What WN wants from Obama and what the SPLC wants are not the same

Posted by Guessedworker on Monday, 17 November 2008 01:25.

So ... I seriously over-estimated the white American electorate when, twenty-two months ago, I declared that Barrack Hussein’s boy had made his move for the VP. Who’d have thought that a vacuus appeal to empty minds could rout the governing right? Again.

But I did at least predict that Obama will:-

... divide America like no other, which I presume to be a good. Should the nationalist American, then, hope that Hillary so scares the cattle he actually wins the nomination? Should the hope even be that he strides to victory on November 4th next year over a prostrate John McCain (or Rudi Giuliani)?

The Giuliani thing wasn’t such a great call, that’s for sure. But, anyway, now we’ve got this black - a probable empty suit - and his blacker, angry wife on their way to the White House we can ask ourselves what the result could be for WN.

For all of those twenty-two months the general assumption has certainly been that a black in the White House will create a tidal wave of new support for “the movement”. It seems inevitable. The Obamessiah is bound to experience a little difficulty in blessing his errant people with “change”. Human nature does not change. Radical leftist objectives are never gratefully seized upon by a subject people. They are imposed by force.

But, it seems to me now that a great deal depends on how successfully Obama’s team and the “liberal” media can play on the violent redneck factor, while at the same time confounding white fears of KFC parties on the White House lawn and fresh Affirmative Action legislation before Congress. That could keep the fence-sitters a-sitting and those who become disillussioned with the trope of “change” still convinced of the electoral claim that only white racism is holding America back from a golden new dawn.

Obviously, the media power exists to do this. Indeed, the image of the redneck with a noose in one hand and a sniper’s rifle in the other is already getting the full SPLC treatment:-

From msnbc:-

More threats against Obama since election

WASHINGTON - Threats against a new president historically spike right after an election, but from Maine to Idaho law enforcement officials are seeing more against Barack Obama than ever before.

The Secret Service would not comment or provide the number of cases they are investigating. But since the Nov. 4 election, law enforcement officials have seen more potentially threatening writings, Internet postings and other activity directed at Obama than has been seen with any past president-elect, said officials aware of the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because the issue of a president’s security is so sensitive.

... One of the most popular white supremacist Web sites got more than 2,000 new members the day after the election, compared with 91 new members on Election Day, according to an AP count. The site, stormfront.org, was temporarily off-line Nov. 5 because of the overwhelming amount of activity it received after Election Day. On Saturday, one Stormfront poster, identified as Dalderian Germanicus, of North Las Vegas, said, “I want the SOB laid out in a box to see how ‘messiahs’ come to rest. God has abandoned us, this country is doomed.”

It is not surprising that a black president would galvanize the white supremacist movement, said Mark Potok, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center, who studies the white supremacy movement.

“The overwhelming flavor of the white supremacist world is a mix of desperation, confusion and hoping that this will somehow turn into a good thing for them,” Potok said. He said hate groups have been on the rise in the past seven years because of a common concern about immigration.

From The Huffington Post:-

After the Election

Mark Potok

... Even before the campaign was over, racial rage, clearly driven by fear of a black man in the White House, began to break out around the country. Effigies of Obama appeared hanging from nooses on university campuses. Angry supporters of John McCain and Sarah Palin shouted “Kill him!” at a campaign rally and even screamed “nigger” at a black cameraman, telling him, “Sit down, boy!” The head of the Hillsborough County, Fla., Republican Party sent an E-mail warning members of “the threat” of “carloads of black Obama supporters coming from the inner city to cast their votes.” A reporter who has covered every presidential election since 1980 told me he had never seen such fury. Similar scenes were reported nationwide.

Naturally, the rage also engulfed the radical right. Thom Robb, an Arkansas Klan leader, described for a reporter the “race war” he sees developing “between our people, who I see as the rightful owners and leaders of this great country, and their people, the blacks.” In Tennessee, two neo-Nazi skinheads went further, allegedly planning to murder black schoolchildren, shoot and behead other African Americans, and assassinate Obama. They were arrested two weeks before the election.

A healthy majority of Americans did vote to send Obama to the Oval Office. But, clearly, there are people—perhaps millions of them—who are deeply upset over his victory for reasons that are fundamentally racial. And their anger is likely to intensify as the economy, especially unemployment, continues to worsen.

“Historically, when times get tough in our nation, that’s how movements like ours gain a foothold,” Jeff Schoep, the leader of the National Socialist Movement, a neo-Nazi group with 73 chapters in 34 states, told USA Today. “When the economy suffers, people are looking for answers. ... We are the answer for white people.”

And even in England:-

White rage: The rednecks out to kill Obama

“There’s not any question he’s under more threat than most politicians,” said Mark Potok, one of America’s leading researchers into hate groups who edits a monthly Intelligence Report for the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center. “I think we are seeing a kind of perfect storm of conditions that might well help white supremacist movements grow, and grow rapidly.

“We have changing demographics, and the Census Bureau projection that whites will lose their majority status in America by 2040. We have the tanking economy, and now… a black man in the White House. This makes some Americans feel they are losing their world – the sense that the country their forefathers built is slipping away from them.”

The number of racist hate groups tracked by the Southern Poverty Law Centre has grown by almost 50 per cent during the Bush administration years, from about 600 in 2000 to almost 900 now. In contrast to the 1990s, when the “angry white man” phenomenon fuelled the militia movement and led to the white-supremacist inspired Oklahoma City bombing, much of this new growth has been triggered by virulent hostility to immigrants pouring in from Mexico.

It is entirely possible, though, that the emphasis will change now that Obama is about to enter the White House. Certainly, the neo-Nazi movement senses an opportunity: to judge by the endless chatter on far-right websites, they see a President Obama as the best recruiting tool they’ve had in years. “Obama will be a signal, a clear signal for millions of our people,” the former Louisiana Ku Klux Klan leader and erstwhile candidate for governor, David Duke, wrote earlier this year in an essay he called A Black Flag for White America. “Obama is like that new big dark spot on your arm that finally sends you to the doctor for some real medicine. ... Obama is the pain that let’s [sic] your body know that something is dreadfully wrong… Millions of European Americans will inevitably react with new awareness of their heritage and the need for them to defend and advance it.”

That logic suggests the far right is not, in fact, itching to pull the trigger on Obama. Except that we are hardly dealing with rational people. The neo-Nazi magazine National Socialist wrote a cover story in September purporting to debunk the “myth” that Obama might be assassinated. But the cover also showed a photograph of the candidate in the crosshairs of a rifle (altered to look like a swastika) under the headline: “Kill this NIGGER?” And the piece went on to suggest that Obama, backed by Communists and Jews, planned to commit genocide against working white people.

Likewise, the “imperial wizard” of the Ku Klux Klan, an Indiana railway worker who calls himself Ray Larsen, denied any intent to attack Obama when interviewed on television a few months ago. But he added: “If that man is elected president, he’ll be shot sure as hell.”

Easy for Potok to make WN the enemy of all mankind, isn’t it? And profitable, too. The SPLC has a symbiotic relationship with extreme entities, or nonentities, like the National Socialist Movement. If WN was a responsible movement focussed on a national organisation of a racialist conservative character like Vlaams Belang, life would be immeasurably more difficult for Mo and Mark and Heidi. Indeed, in Europe where nationalist parties are contesting elections it isn’t Jewish front organisations that lead the rhetorical opposition to them, it’s mainstream politicians. That is the measure of political seriousness to which WN must aspire.

We should be looking for change from the Obama presidency, but in the area the political Establishment least expects. If it is capable of reforming itself ... of ceasing to be negative and self-destructive ... ceasing to be a career opportunity for a few “big men”, then WN can meet any appointment with history that may come out of this extraordinary passage in American politics.

The problem, as ever, is how to get to the politically ordinary yet exalted and promising “there” from the desperately frustrating and static “here”.

Tags: White Nationalism

Comments:

Posted by onetwothree on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 04:07 | #

Read through some of the comments at that SPLC link. It’s really weird—like stepping into a world that doesn’t exist, where the Nazis are around every corner (yet ever so stupid, “nutters”, and so on), where anyone outside the multicult is “racist” and therefore “supremacist” and therefore “hateful” and therefore “evil”.

It’s crude, like anti-Hun WWI propaganda. It’s easy to say, “Oh, these people are all brainwashed”, but…it really does seem that way.

Posted by Carsten Westermarck on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 04:17 | #

Most of my friends know that my hobby consists of reading Plato and looking for ways his predictions manifest themselves in our current civilization. Plato’s observation was that civilizations have a life cycle, starting with a clear goal and as that fragments, proceeding into an ultra-pluralistic state where eventually the citizens have nothing in common and democracy marches into tyranny.

As he was quick to point out, tyranny never looks like tyranny because if it did it would be wholly ineffective. It approaches instead with kindness. Like all dualistic things, this makes it more fun to try to spot, because its character is positive in appearance but negative in effect. People who know of this reading ignore me except when they’re scared, and then they ask questions.

In the suburban-urban circle of friends — play dates, beers on the porch, volunteering at the recycling center — the overwhelming question asked is: will white nationalists/supremacists assassinate Barack Obama?

My answer is no, for a simple reason. The white power fringe is nowhere near as organized or powerful as portrayed in the media. The two “assassination attempts” so far involved out of work guys high on meth talking big with no follow through. To assassinate a presidential candidate involves planning, deception, skill and knowledge of the subject’s movements; neither of the attempts listed so far had even an ounce of any of that (but they did have several ounces of meth).

When you read in your newspaper about white supremacists, statistics are often cited about how many white supremacist groups there are in the USA. What they don’t tell you is that most of these “groups” are two guys with meth, a computer, a shotgun and a Geocities page. The far-right is in a shambles in the United States and is unlikely to issue forth a coherent statement in the next twenty years, much less manage to even approach a presidential candidate.

Why do we hear so much about white supremacy then? To put it crudely, those who we depend on for our data make their money from overstating the threat. The ADL, SPLC, One People’s Project etc get donations every time they drum up a Nazi threat to minorities and religious minorities, so they turn two guys with a shotgun and a meth habit into an army of jackbooted fanatics. The money comes in. Mission accomplished.

So my verdict is that Obama’s safe. I just don’t see these disorganized, marginalized people mounting an attack. As an addendum to that, I think the people who watch them are pretty good — the law enforcement people, the FBI and secret service. One major reason they’re good is that when your targets can’t stop taking meth and buying illegal guns, it’s easy to turn informants. “Hold up there, Jethro, this looks like an ounce of meth and an unlicensed AK-47. Saaayyy… instead of doing 30 years in Cell Block Sodomy, how about you just keep us informed on what your fellow Knights of the Burning Auslander are doing? Keep it real, buddy.” They even pay off their informants in cold hard taxpayer cash because if you pay them for any rumor, you’ll get lots of tremors if anything real is going on.

There are far-right groups to watch, but generally they’re more of the rationale not race war types. They’re just not the ones to get press. I’ll break the list down for you here.

Groovers and Fakers

Stormfront
Not a white supremacist group as much as a giant discussion forum with 100,000 members, most of whom appear to be receiving disability.

Vanguard
Not a white supremacist group so much as a humor and news publication from a pro-white angle.

American Nazi Party
Moribund remnants of George Lincoln Rockwell’s party.

National Alliance
Moribund remnants of William Luther Pierce’s party.

National Socialist Movement
More interested in spiffy uniforms than action.

The Klan
Unable to achieve any action more organized than beating up Panamanian teens.

These groups, while they achieve the overwhelming majority of the media attention on this issue, are also the least likely to take action — and if they do take action, they’re the least likely to take organized, effective action with a chance of being effective. If these people decide to assassinate Obama, the safest place will be standing next to him.

Movers and Shakers

American Renaissance
Scientific race separatists who do nothing more extreme than hold a yearly conference at a major hotel chain.

Council of Conservative Citizens
Includes an opposition to multiculturalism.

Majority Rights
More displeased intellectuals. Pass the arugula.

Civic Platform
More scientific racists, traditionalists.

Libertarian National Socialist Green Party
No one is certain if they’re “for real” or not.

White Aryan Resistance
This group has been around forever but continues to grow.

In summary, we have some groups that are violent and ineffective, and others whose goal is to spread white supremacy rhetoric at parties and play dates. The former may try to assassinate President-Elect Obama, but will surely fail; the latter will not try, but will write nasty things on the internet about him. The FBI is watching both groups. I’m fairly certain he’s safe.

http://www.extremepolitics.org/2008/…the-far-right/

Posted by anonymous on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 04:53 | #

“Human nature does not change.”

What a crazy statement.

Posted by Ground Coverage Operator on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:35 | #

I know it’s fashionable here amongst the MR intellectuals to disparage Stormfront, but I’ve been monitoring, and recently started participating in, their fora over the last few years. SF is merely a discussion site (nothing wrong with that!) and does not pretend to be anything else. I don’t think the value of this role should be underestimated. I recently met some local Sfers for beers and, thankfully, they were not fat skinhead types with tattoos, but rather young White guys of (from what I could tell) above-average intelligence but with no clear direction. What they and the rest of us need, of course, is as GW says a national organisation of a racialist conservative character like Vlaams Belang, or I would add, the BNP, where we can devote money and time to a useful purpose in practical politics. My involvement in party politics was many years ago, in the Tories and the GOP, or else I would get involved. But get involved with what? We have nothing. We are truly disenfranchised. It’s heartbreaking to watch WNs fall over themselves to line up behind the latest Great White Hope such as Ron Paul or Sarah Palin, only to see their dreams dashed. I think there is an enormous and growing population of pissed-off Whites in the US who are aching for such an organisation.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 06:11 | #

From the Mail article at the log entry’s last embedded link:

“The British National Party has scored a surprise victory in a council by-election. The far-Right party took a seat in the Lincolnshire market town of Boston, where migrants make up a quarter of the population. Anti-racism campaigners warned that the win would lead to scaremongering about foreigners and an increase in violence and threats.”

I’ve highlit a few mistakes in red: 1) The BNP aren’t a “far-right” party. They’re not “far” anything. They’re strictly a middle-of-the-road centrist party. 2) Why “migrants”? Why not “excessive numbers of unwanted incompatible immigrants whose presence in such wildly inappropriate numbers thanks to NuLabour causes problems and friction in all manner of ways”? 3) Those campaigners aren’t “anti-racist” but pro-genocide. They’re properly referred to as the “pro-genocide campaigners.”

Notice the Mail editor chose what has got to be THE most unflattering photo of Nick Griffin he could scrounge up: he must really have searched through his files to find that one! This is a dirty little trick the Jewish press here in the States resorts to all the time and is part of why they induce nausea so badly.

Posted by Diamed on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:23 | #

We don’t need a political party or a political, democratic movement. All we need is guns and the will to use them. Even participating in democracy is gambling under the casino’s rules. The House always wins. If anyone thinks democracy produces legitimate results with all the outside factors such as education, media brainwashing, fundraising, lobbying, and the name-recognition status of incumbency, they are blind as a bat. People are manipulated into voting against their own interests, nothing is done for the public good, the government lies to the electorate about everything and hides behind a vast wall of secrecy, making all our decisions uninformed and manipulable. This is not a process worth entering. The game is fixed and all that will ever happen there is loss after loss after loss at some measly 1% of the vote. The winner takes all election rules of the USA mean no matter how many people vote third party, their vote doesn’t count and no one represents them. Europe is lucky to have its nationalist parties, but there is no way the same solution can work in America. Remember we are only about half white, real white, not including muslims and jews, whereas Europe revels in such high percentages as 80-90%. Even if we gained huge traction among white voters, we would still lose every election, our country will be majority non-white in a couple decades, the current crop of kids born this year is majority non-white. How will voting save us from that? What a waste of time.

Posted by Howdy on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:23 | #

At least let us put the “Obama is a great speaker” myth to rest; the poor guy is totally lost without a teleprompter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU&feature=related

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:08 | #

Diamed,

A respectable political opposition to globalism, progressivism, Jewish nationalism and race-replacement by non-whites - one that expresses the true rights and interests of white Americans - is absolutely essential to grounding the struggle for survival in the public consciousness. It’s as I said on the Birdman thread: no resistance can be sustained without substantial tacit and active support from within the people.

Mass political support, if it can be built, can have two effects. First, it can alter the political landscape locally. The whole American electorate will doubtless never hand a white racialist conservative party power in Washington. But power locally can be winnable, as it is in Europe. And, actually, the federal system, with its distribution of powers at state and city level, is a very good environment for a local power strategy.

A party for whites primarily fighting on such a strategy would vastly enhance the prospects for balkanisation/secession in America, too.

The second effect is that even nationally the system would have to adjust. No matter what you say, system-playing politicians would still have to appeal to the white electorate for their ticket to Washington. There would be more Tancredos, more Hunters, more Pauls and fewer Brownbacks and Kennedys making that journey.

Of course, there are formidable problems with bringing a new political party into being. It needs a common platform, serious activists and money - all three problematic at present. The NPI was intended by Regnery as a seedcorn operation for these. But there is a fourth necessity: genuine leadership. Without that, I am not at all hopeful that the change white America so desperately needs will be delivered. But if it isn’t, Europe too will fare less well in its own struggle for survival.

Posted by The Diversitoid on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:12 | #

But Daniel Finkelstein says the craKKKaz are out to get Lord Obama!

What shall we do???

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:51 | #

So under The Times’ system Finkelstein is the moderator on his own writings. That explains it. Never trust a Jew to allow a non-Jewish POV to be aired.

Posted by silver on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:37 | #

Read through some of the comments at that SPLC link. It’s really weird—like stepping into a world that doesn’t exist, where the Nazis are around every corner (yet ever so stupid, “nutters”, and so on), where anyone outside the multicult is “racist” and therefore “supremacist” and therefore “hateful” and therefore “evil”.

It’s crude, like anti-Hun WWI propaganda. It’s easy to say, “Oh, these people are all brainwashed”, but…it really does seem that way.

What do you suppose the average person alighting on a WN blog/board, where insaniacs everywhere rule the roost, makes of it?

There’s no question in my mind that the average WN is as far off in la-la land as the average multiculter. You might not see it, but I certainly do.

“Human nature does not change.”

What a crazy statement.

And, sadly, all too typical of the WN hubris. Look, WN gets it right about racial differences and the character of multiracial societies. That’s about it. Somehow, though, hereditarian WNs feel qualified to deliver half-baked verdicts on everything else under the sun, too.

Radical leftist objectives are never gratefully seized upon by a subject people.

Except when they are. You might want to rethink that, GW. No, I’m talking about the last fifty years—history didn’t start in 1954.

Posted by Diamed on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:20 | #

A political party whose true intention is not actually to win elections, as you explain, seems far more reasonable. Instead, I gather, it just uses the elections as an excuse to spread its message, incite secession, create a unified white nationalist platform, etc. These ulterior motives might be served by agitating democratically and politically, but the primary motive of voting in a pro-white government is impossible due to the roadblocks described.

You overestimate the ‘federal’ nature of the USA everything important is decided in DC. Immigration and civil rights laws for instance, no locality can do anything about, and these are the only two important laws white nationalists want changed. Therefore no electoral gain can possibly win us anything. The only benefit I can see is another vehicle to spread the message and ‘prime the pump’ ie get people used to thinking about racial loyalty and solidarity for ‘crunch time.’

However I’m severely pessimistic about Any strategy right now because currently, any reasonable look at the world and the future counts out any hope at all for America, no matter what white nationalists do. There probably won’t even BE a crunch time, I only mention it because it’s a better hope than winning an election. I’m not sure how a charismatic leader could change the facts on the ground. Basically, I believe history occurs due to trends, and vast impersonal forces, I do not think any particular person is of any importance in what happens. Politicians don’t set public policy, they follow it, that’s how they attach themselves to the fame while not actually being responsible. Whether you’re Napoleon or Hitler vast impersonal forces led those wars to occur, necessity and public foment were at a pitch, the will of the people had spoken, etc. I believe any leader, even if he were a one-eyed corrupt evil retard, will do once the people and history have chosen for a counter-reaction, and no leader, even if he were the next Jesus on earth (who himself is a product of vast impersonal forces and popular foment—remember how many jesus-look-alikes there were at the time, all sorts of prophets, cults of Mithras, Osiris, miracle stories, etc, because the time called for them they came out of the woodwork) is any use until that counter-reaction has occurred.

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:12 | #

Silver,

1789? A revolution by sections of the upper and the middle-classes, not by “the people”. The American revolution? Also a minority affair. Most were loyal subjects of the English king and wished to remain so. But by “radical left objectives”, as you clearly know, I am talking about the application of anti-human Marxist egalitarian principles in the 20th century - definitely a minority affair.

We can safely assume, I think, that the degree of state coercion and terror which has been employed by 20th century Marxists in power is indicative of the human impossibility of the objectives pursued. That’s my point, really - we have to anticipate some humanly impossible demands from Obama if he is, in fact, similarly radically leftist. The indications are that he is, for which reason we have been played this mood-music of soulful national redemption instead of a hard agenda. The radical leftist agenda can never be sold on a political market stall out in the democratic open air.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:14 | #

Silver’s comment is totally rejected. We’re being deliberately genocided, and we are saying we oppose the other side’s deliberate genocide of ourselves. That’s it. That’s all we’re doing. And Silver finds fault with that. For Silver that explicit opposition on our part is impermissible, over the top, indecent, insane. In objecting to our own genocide we’ve overstepped the bounds of decency are are scaring everybody, according to him, so we need to stop objecting to it so explicitly. We should accept our genocide quietly so as not to alarm anyone, according to him. Well, we’re not going to accept it, quietly or otherwise. Anyone scared by that needs to address himself to the ones perpetrating the genocide, not the ones trying to defend themselves against it. What are you doing coming here to complain, Silver? We’re not the perps, the ADL is, the ACLU is, the AJC is, the SPLC is, all the other known culprits are. Make them stop the genocide and we here will all pack up and go home in the next five minutes. You’re complaining at the wrong web-site. Go tell Abe Foxman to stop his genocide, don’t come here and tell us we have to quietly swallow Abe Foxman’s genocide of us.

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:17 | #

Here’s the Gordian Knot, GW:

Anti-Euro multicult supremacists have invaded the Eurosphere (under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 and US hegemony during this period) and seized control of the word “supremacist”. In order for the respectable universal nationalist perspective to express, we must fight off supremacists of all stripes, be they “white supremacists” or anti-euro supremacists. If we take the justifiable actions in defense of our respectable position, we are going to naturally place more emphasis on opposing the anti-Euro multicult supremacists than the white supremacists because the anti-Euro multicult supremacists are in power and many, if not most, of the “white supremacists” are simply responding to what they understandably see as an enemy that is incapable of anything but Malthusian race warfare for global supremacy, hypocritically masked by any and all guises.

This creates the phenomenon I have described before where, at best, we are under the gun of a mass murderer who wants to mop up the last witnesses and is understandably skeptical of our claim to simply wanting to be left alone—that we won’t retaliate if set free: “No—you want to KILL me!!!!” is the mass murderer’s reply.

Who can deny the accusation?

Posted by Guest on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:10 | #

I would estimate that WNs are about 1,200 in the USA, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t more Whites who have some similar feelings. SF numbers are way over the top. What percentage of SF posters and readers are law enforcement, Jewish alphabet agencies, and anti-White Whites, and Israelis is hard to to guess although ALL of those are, in fact, on SF right now.

I think the Jewish Supremacists will not let up until Whites are effectively genocided. Probably through attrition rather than Holocausting the Whites.

They will have NO TROUBLE from White population, zero, nada, none.

Now if American Whites were CHECHENS on the other hand or Lebanese Shia...

Posted by Guest on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:22 | #

Never trust a Jew to allow a non-Jewish POV to be aired.

Jared Taylor’s AR censors all constructive criticism of God’s Self-Chosen.
Now how are White survival oriented peoples supposed to form a good decision if they are WITHHELD the FACTS about the gang who created the dispossession of Whites in our native lands? Our habitats?

http://www.heretical.com/miscellx/culturec.html

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:27 | #

James Bowery: “In order for the respectable universal nationalist perspective to express, we must fight off supremacists of all stripes, be they “white supremacists” or anti-euro supremacists.”

For a world order based upon Salterian universal nationalism to be constructed and endure it seems self-evident to me that the White race MUST occupy the top slot in terms of power, and in order for him to have the requisite power he must control a sufficient quotient of resources (e.g., arable land, fuels, bio-diversity).

“...“white supremacists” are simply responding to what they understandably see as an enemy that is incapable of anything but Malthusian race warfare for global supremacy, hypocritically masked by any and all guises.”

I am aware of zero evidence to the contrary that the ‘character’ of other races is in fact a “Malthusian” cut-throat competitor for resources.

Assuming all this is true, isn’t Salterian universal nationalism, then, nothing but a noble lie more suited to the purpose of convincing our own folk to work to secure their existence; and, also, to rein in the revenge and competitor elimination impulses that are so closely associated with ethnocentrism?

To put it more pointedly, if there is such a thing as the ‘Master Race’, the White race is obviously it. But if we openly proclaim it our people will not listen to us even if the price of not so doing is their genocide; and, once in power, if we openly proclaim it, the price of so doing may mean the extermination of many non-Whites.

If we are able to pull off Salterian universal nationalism, which is nominal racial separation, we will still have to shoulder the ‘White man’s burden’ to enforce it. We will be the ‘Master Race’ in all but name.

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:43 | #

Of course, ‘Master’ can be benevolent or cruel, exploitative, or even exterminatory, but he is masterly, whether he chooses to admit it to himself and/or others or not. IOW, he is ‘Master’ because he is the strongest, the most powerful; and to be as such he must strive to cultivate his strength and power.

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:44 | #

If so, then let be de facto rather than de jure.

This is my general response to reactive white supremacists:

Not to worry. If you are correct then adopt an objectively fair test of humanity—the test being whether they really can live and let live (even if it means they die due to their own failings within their territory). Failing the test means forfeiting their human rights. Yes, I know, the vast majority of other races have (and perhaps even a majority of our own race has) already failed by virtue of their opposition to those of us who demand simply our own sovereign territory for the vast demography that has been fleeing from diversity for a generation now. They have failed the test of humanity and may be dealt with as one would deal with animals: No need to be inhumane but certainly no tolerance for putting humans at further risk by letting animals run wild in civilization.

Posted by silver on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:48 | #

1789?

History didn’t begin then, either.

But by “radical left objectives”, as you clearly know, I am talking about the application of anti-human Marxist egalitarian principles in the 20th century - definitely a minority affair.

I know what you’re talking about. But all change was “radical” in its day. I’m pretty sure the serfs appreciated what was done for them.

Silver’s comment is totally rejected. We’re being deliberately genocided, and we are saying we oppose the other side’s deliberate genocide of ourselves. That’s it. That’s all we’re doing.

Why do you always presume to speak for everyone else, Scrooby?

And Silver finds fault with that.

I find fault with the way you’re going about it. You’re repellant (and, more often than you’d care to admit, just plain loony). There’s no need to be and that’s what I’m pointing out.

For Silver that explicit opposition on our part is impermissible, over the top, indecent, insane. In objecting to our own genocide we’ve overstepped the bounds of decency are are scaring everybody, according to him, so we need to stop objecting to it so explicitly. We should accept our genocide quietly so as not to alarm anyone, according to him.

According to your own feverish imagination, more like it.

It’s your own people, numbnuts, you’re scaring away. Your one-track minds cause you to be many, many, many more times strident than you need to be. (Do I have to name names? In your own case, you can just look in the mirror.)

Of the two of us, Scrooby, who do you imagine would make the more favorable public impression were we given the opportunity to air our views? There’s your problem.

Posted by silver on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:10 | #

For a world order based upon Salterian universal nationalism to be constructed and endure it seems self-evident to me that the White race MUST occupy the top slot in terms of power, and in order for him to have the requisite power he must control a sufficient quotient of resources (e.g., arable land, fuels, bio-diversity).

You don’t need a “world order.” Where do you come up with this stuff?

If we are able to pull off Salterian universal nationalism, which is nominal racial separation, we will still have to shoulder the ‘White man’s burden’ to enforce it.

Why would you care about what anyone else does after you’re seprated?

and, once in power, if we openly proclaim it, the price of so doing may mean the extermination of many non-Whites.

My guess is that only you and a small coterie of early-adopter hardasses feel unable, or fear they might be unable, to restrain themselves from killing everything non-white in sight. It would be nice if a way could be found to off you all. You’re ever so desperately not needed.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:21 | #

Two worthy threads here and here. The first featuring Wintermute, the estimable MRstinks and the potential of nuclear genocide under universal nationalism. And the second featuring Godless-Capitalists screed that WNs will have to fight for their right to party.

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:43 | #

“Yes, I know, the vast majority of other races (and perhaps even a majority of our own race) have already failed by virtue of their opposition to those of us who demand simply our own sovereign territory for the vast demography that has been fleeing from diversity for a generation now.” - James Bowery

We need those of our race who have “failed” the test to guarantee or at least increase the odds of our own survival. We need numbers. The problem as I see it is the high indoctrinability combined with the low ethnocentrism of our people. Even if a ‘philosophic cure’ to what ails us is found we will still have to indoctrinate our people to it, but we do not control the centers of indoctrination; our enemies do.

So, we can secede, and hope the powers at be don’t oppose us. But they probably will, in which case we must hope that we have sufficient strength and numbers to stave them off; which is doubtful.

Or else, we can hope to come up with a message that appeals to enough of our people sans control of the centers of indoctrination so that they will stand with us and for themselves to resist the likely opposition. Their willingness to listen is likely to be a result of conditions on the ground, the hardships they experience that can only be forgone as a result of racial solidarity. But if we have enough people on our side why not make the extra push for total power and remove our enemies from the centers of indoctrination and indoctrinate the rest of our people?

Further, I recall seeing an Anderson Cooper special on CNN about the efforts to preserve the Brazilian rain forests from slash-and-burn farming, a laudable and important undertaking. But, half of the soldiers doing the guarding were northern Europeans. What a joke. Only the White man gives a damn about responsible sustainability. If/when we withdraw into our shell and stop feeding all the poor brownsters there will be mass starvation. And what’s on the menu then? Bush meat. Now should we stand back and let them dine to their hearts’ content? I say no. But to prevent them we will need boots on the ground.

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:21 | #

The problem as I see it is the high indoctrinability combined with the low ethnocentrism of our people.

A point that I, myself, have been making for at least 16 years now.

But a question needs to be answered:

Is the condition(ing) reversible?

Given the state of psychology in the wake of Freud and co., we just don’t have the answers, nor is repair of the field likely to be without very substantial human cost.

It is frequently the case that parasites leave permanent extended phenotypes imprinted on their victims that are, indeed, practically irreversible. We can hope that advances in science and technology will let us salvage more humanity but at this point it _is_ a hope.

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:30 | #

And what’s on the menu then? Bush meat. Now should we stand back and let them dine to their hearts’ content?

Of course not. This is a question of of conservation. If an invasive species introduced by human technology substantially threatens biodiversity humans should take appropriate action. The question of the appropriate balance between human carrying capacity and natural biodiversity is important and is one of the main reasons I’ve been talking about focusing our message on being “Life’s Universal Warriors”. Read that article carefully. It’s a message I’ve been promoting for a lot more than 16 years.

Posted by snax on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:32 | #

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the task of guarding the President became a Secret Service job in the same year that the Fed was created.

Posted by Armor on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:54 | #

the average WN is as far off in la-la land as the average multiculter (—Silver)

It depends who you label as “WN”. Personally, all I need to do, to feel in la-la land, is turn the radio on. I don’t need to read the SPLC website. I also feel in la-la land when I see :
- voters trying to ignore their government’s mass immigration policy,
- environmentalists ignoring immigration,
- workers’ trade unions promoting immigration,
- the IRA’s Gerry Adams promoting race replacement,
- or any idealist who tries to make society marginally better through hard work, but is afraid to say a word against wholesale people-replacement.

It reminds me of the film The Bridge on the River Kwai, where Alec Guinness, because of his work ethic, works for the Japanese army.

Having a white nationalist outlook is like being the only one not pretending he can’t see the elephant or the 800-pound gorilla in the corner of the room. Andersen’s tale, the New clothes of the Emperor, is a good comparison too.

What do you suppose the average person alighting on a WN blog/board, where insaniacs everywhere rule the roost, makes of it? (—Silver)

Most people resent the media propaganda, and share the views of the white nationalists, but are still afraid to vote for the BNP. Reading WN websites will give them more confidence to trust their own opinions.

Posted by silver on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:36 | #

Two worthy threads here and here. The first featuring Wintermute, the estimable MRstinks and the potential of nuclear genocide under universal nationalism. And the second featuring Godless-Capitalists screed that WNs will have to fight for their right to party.

Excellent threads. That first was a real doozy. Whatever happened to do that WM guy? The way he handed “MRStink’s” ass to him, that’s something to savor. I couldn’t agree more with:

So, making a place for everyone, and making everyone in their place, strikes me as a sound goal, given what we know of human predilections, the interactions of liberty and multiracialism, etc. I would be very happy to visit Anime Island, just as I would be very happy to live in my own heimat among my own kind. Aside from the considerations of separation, which I will admit are frought with difficulty, why should there be ill-will between the different subspecies of sapiens? All this surplus hatred is a byproduct of what the greedy and the stupid have forced on the world.

That’s how to do hate right. (You listening Cap’n?)

Now, how do you get there? What you need is what marketing hypsters on the get-rich seminar circuit call a “Uniqe Selling Proposition.” What does your ideology offer me that the others don’t? For racialist, that’s a cinch: avoid being niggerized! Join us and you too can spare your kids from Black Plague II: This Time It’s Literal. That’s something everyone, hispanics to hindoos, dagoes to dravidians, chicanos to chinks, jews to japs, can buy into. Well, maybe not everyone. But there are enough civilized non-white people out there who could be recruited to racialism’s cause. They just need some reassurance that it won’t all lead to an American Aushwitz. And the best way to avoid that is to frickin stop wishing it would or sounding like you wish it would.

Posted by Jupiter on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:56 | #

I hope the scummy Barack Obama picks a fight with the Russians. If he does, like JFK, he will bring the world to the brink. The Russians won’t back down to the magical negro. I expect honest Leftist to take the magical negro on if and when he escalates the level of violence in the middle east and afghanistan. I expect the magical negro’s negro followers to scream racism if this ever happens.

Millions of White American live meaningless unforfilling lives for why else would they sit in front of the TV watching young negro and spic mulitmillionaires in tight spandex in front of their wives and teenage daughters?

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:57 | #

In so blithely ignoring the Gordian Knot, silver renders himself ignorable.

Posted by silver on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:19 | #

I’m not ignoring it, Bowery. I’m proposing a way to cut it.

I could just as easily suggest that by ignoring the inhumanity of retaliation (that he’s probably itching for), Bowery renders himself ignorable.

Quite the impasse, to say the least.

Posted by silver on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:21 | #

Armor,

It depends who you label as “WN”.

Let’s see.

I hope the scummy Barack Obama picks a fight with the Russians. If he does, like JFK, he will bring the world to the brink. The Russians won’t back down to the magical negro. I expect honest Leftist to take the magical negro on if and when he escalates the level of violence in the middle east and afghanistan. I expect the magical negro’s negro followers to scream racism if this ever happens.

Millions of White American live meaningless unforfilling lives for why else would they sit in front of the TV watching young negro and spic mulitmillionaires in tight spandex in front of their wives and teenage daughters?

Posted by onetwothree on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:26 | #

Re: The impression of ordinary people to WN. A few days ago someone submitted a stormfront link to the popular (and mostly liberal) site “reddit”, and here’s the massive comment section:

http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/7dprh/black_girl_writes_to_white_supremacists_about_how/

...make of it what you will, but most of the people don’t seem to think the stormfronters are la-la. At least that’s my impression.

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:35 | #

silver: “I could just as easily suggest that by ignoring the inhumanity of retaliation (that he’s probably itching for), Bowery renders himself ignorable.”

Neither one of us relishes the prospect of utilizing utterly ruthless violence to “cut the Gordian Knot”, which is in fact a noose around the neck of the White race. Will non-Whites with sufficient pull and power amongst their own people aid in releasing their grip on the other end of the rope when what is really at stake is clearly explained to them (i.e., no White race, no boku carrying capacity, and you all starve)? Certainly not the Jews. I think that goes without saying. Negroes, Mestizoes and Arabs? LOL! Indians? Chinese? Maybe, but I doubt it.

But, if we are serious, if we take the prospect of our people’s survival as seriously as we take drawing our next breath we will do what we must. At the moment of truth, if our enemies will not yield, as one man once said, then, they must be beaten to their knees. In that scenario, their casualties must be maximized while ours’ are minimized.

Posted by Jupiter on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:42 | #

And who are those non-white sympatizers you had in mind silver? I’ll take a guess:those wonderfull asian LEGAL asian immigrants from China and India who have put a big sign in certain parts of California that says:FOR ASIANS ONLY.

Non-Whites clearly have been waging a demographic war against Native Born White Americans-REAL AMERICANS-for over three decades. A line has been crossed. It is just a question when a critical number of Native Born White Americans realize that the line has been crossed and that there is no going back. If you read the most recent news posted over at American Renassaince this evening, it is clear that resistance to racial dispossession is increasing.

The delicate race realists would like to cut a deal with the asians in America. I want to drive them out. The days after 9/11, made it very clear that there was a sizable constituency in America to drive both the asians and muslims out of America.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:46 | #

And the best way to avoid that is to frickin stop wishing it would or sounding like you wish it would.

This is MRstinks position vis-a-vis Salter’s universal nationalism. Yet you gleefully pronounced that the mute man handed stinks his ass. Which is it? Are you advocating “a little protective coloration for his otherwise morally ticklish theory?” or do you actually know how the “Chinese and Israelis” will react to the idea.

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:48 | #

I’m not ignoring it, Bowery. I’m proposing a way to cut it.

Pretending not to notice the aggression of others for the sake of appearances, silver doesn’t cut the Gordian Knot. silver invites more of the same and justifiable suspicions from the invaders that he lacks sincerity if he isn’t merely a coward.

Indeed, by reading my statement:

No need to be inhumane but certainly no tolerance for putting humans at further risk by letting animals run wild in civilization.

as “ignoring the inhumanity of retaliation”, silver renders himself relevant again:

He IS the Gordian Knot.

Posted by Anonymous on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:10 | #

Somehow, though, hereditarian WNs feel qualified to deliver half-baked verdicts on everything else under the sun, too.

Could they help me pick out some curtains that go with the couch and loveseat? Seriously, I haven’t seen much in the way of half-baked verdicts on other topics around here. You must be thinking of another website.

Posted by Diamed on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:21 | #

It’s pleasant to find Wintermute and other commentators have already taken on the challenge of explaining why, precisely, we should spare anyone if we were to gain power again. It’s obviously a current of thought that cannot be dammed no matter how ‘unappealing’ it is. Indeed, nothing in EGI or in the linked thread shows any logical moral obligation to not genocide our competitors.

Arguments have been made saying it’s impractical, but that could change at any moment and is thus not a very far-reaching statement. What if it became practical? What if a red button were delivered to you today, and the instruction manual read, ‘push this to erase all non-whites from the earth,’ it would certainly then be practical, leading only to the question, would you take this unprecedented opportunity to save your people or would you let it slip away for some ‘better endpoint’ that may or may not ever happen? Will you gamble the fate of your children on reaching this ‘better ending’ or is a white world good enough, if we can make it happen?

Arguments have also been made that we can do ‘better than a white world,’ but does anyone think a world full of conflicting races, cultures, religions, and so on is the Safest and most Reliable future for our people? I agree that there are formulas that are ‘more ideal’ and fulfill a few extra bells and whistles, add a little side benefit, but none pass the test of Safe and Reliable. To trade away my chance at complete world conquest and never-ending growth of my own preferred people and ideology, it cannot just be ‘slightly more ideal’ or ‘a little better.’ It would have to be some compelling interest, a necessity, not a convenience. Is it an absolute necessity to share the world with non-whites in any way that could pose a threat to us in the future (I posit that the remaining Indian reservations in America, for instance, pose no threat to white America and thus could feasibly exist in a safe, reliable white world) due to some wonderful benefit they give us, or whatever ideal you believe in? If not, what justifies sacrificing a win, a wonderful miraculous win, for just a chance at a savory steak added in to the bargain?

When I see people living a particular way of life, inhabiting a particular state of mind, while typifying what I love most about humanity, and life in general, through their looks, talents, activities, choices, feelings etc, I am happy. This is why I happily read books about such people, watch movies about such people, look at paintings of such people. When I think of a broad canvas of time unrolling into the future, eons upon eons, all of them dominated by THIS folk, this people, this joy-inspiring life, I am content. It is enough, it is perfect, flaws and all. I cannot throw away the happiness in my mind’s eye of such a people, even a 1% chance of losing it, for the sake of something so unimportant and trivial as ‘biodiversity’, ‘cognitive elitism’, or ‘universal golden rule fairness.’ In my mind no argument has been made with any compelling grip on my mind equal to that unrolling canvas that goes on and on into all space and time belonging only to my chosen kind—or something better which alone would replace it, all inferior threats long gone.

Practically speaking, it may be best to be entirely peaceful and just concentrate on developing our wealth, industry and science until we can reach space. However, I do not think the world will let us be, I think through their own actions they have announced their hatred and genocidal intent against us. Therefore I do not think we can ever make progress so long as we are surrounded by 90% of the world with absolute hatred and genocidal intent against us. Asking for peaceful coexistence to a wolf who’s currently devouring your young is slightly insane. What more evidence do we need than black crime, muslim Jihad, jewish parasitism, mexican drug running, South African genocide—what does this forum need to see until we come to the conclusion that peaceful coexistence cannot occur with the majority of this world? How many more crimes and atrocities must be dealt to us? We have practically lost an entire continent, all of North America, while we hem and haw over whether this is adequate ‘proof’ that we cannot coexist peacefully or not. How many more until people are convinced?

Sliver keeps helpfully reminding us that for ‘political considerations’ we shouldn’t talk about serious issues, or ever think about forbidden topics, because they make us ‘look bad.’ He insists that we all censor our thinking and our conclusions, even if we believe them, to ‘get more support.’ But where can we discuss these matters except here? Must we only hold these conversations face to face in private without offending onlookers? And how far are we willing to live a lie to gain these sunshine patriots and summer soldiers, who will apparently betray us if they ever learn the truth about our hearts? Isn’t it important we hash out these questions ahead of time and don’t just ‘wing it’ when we’re in charge? Could there be no more vital topic of debate than ‘suppose we do reclaim our lands, what then?’ The turner diaries gave, honestly and fairly, their ‘what then.’ They would genocide various races found within their borders, hang any whites they’d put on a list as traitors, innocent or guilty alike, and nuke the rest of the world to oblivion after the slightest of provocations. Everyone should put their cards on the table and describe their ‘afterword’ which will, remember, form 99% of human history and is thus the most vital aspect of white national revolution. If your afterword cannot address my concerns about safety and reliability what alternative but to go back to Plan A, the turner diaries? Looking past all the death and mayhem, was the endpoint reached by the Diaries really so bad? Was it something we could not accept?

Posted by silver on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:58 | #

Will non-Whites with sufficient pull and power amongst their own people aid in releasing their grip on the other end of the rope when what is really at stake is clearly explained to them (i.e., no White race, no boku carrying capacity, and you all starve)?

Worked with me, didn’t it? And no one even tried to “explain” a damn thing to me.

Certainly not the Jews. I think that goes without saying.

Why not? Don’t answer if you can’t contain yourself.

Negroes, Mestizoes and Arabs? LOL! Indians? Chinese? Maybe, but I doubt it.

It’s unlikely, sure. But it has the advantage of helping get serious racial discussion on the table.

The issue is cultural, too (a fact so easily forgotten or dismissed in WN circles). Caucasoid hybrids, in this respect, have even greater interest in a racial solution. Savaging them with pejoratives about “mongrels” needlessly scorns a huge potential resource.

Pretending not to notice the aggression of others for the sake of appearances, you don’t cut the Gordian Knot—that is the Gordian Knot.

I’m in no way “ignoring” anything. Antiracism is intellectually and morally respectable, despite my opinion that its inferior. Physical retaliation against it isn’t justifiable in spite of any “aggression” you perceive. And when another’s mere presence is sufficient to constitute “aggression,” proscribing retaliation should go without saying.

This is MRstinks position vis-a-vis Salter’s universal nationalism. Yet you gleefully pronounced that the mute man handed stinks his ass. Which is it?

It’s WM’s, too. The devil is in the details. I have no doubt WM would find more common ground with me than the execrable “stinks.”

The delicate race realists would like to cut a deal with the asians in America. I want to drive them out. The days after 9/11, made it very clear that there was a sizable constituency in America to drive both the asians and muslims out of America.

Where are you going to drive everyone else? Where are you going to send ole Taki after he gets out of hospital?

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 02:01 | #

Asking for peaceful coexistence to a wolf who’s currently devouring your young is slightly insane.

Of course. But I would claim in all sincerity that there are those of other persuasions that are human by the test I put forth above: Live and let live.

By “persuasions” I mean people of all races who want to live in human ecologies that are more natural (racially homogeneous) as well as those who would consent to live in human ecology experiments such as the one being carried out on nonconsenting human subjects by the anti-Euro multicultural supremacists.

Indeed, despite the fact that there exist options to dramatically expand terrestrial carrying capacity, there are few enough of “us” humans—of all persuasions—that if the animals in human bodies were put down (as humanely as practicable) there would be more than enough carrying capacity for all humanity without that expanding carrying—and enough time to open up heliocentric carrying capacity to forestall a Malthusian conflict until we are much more knowledgeable about our own state as humans—indeed—as life’s universal warriors.

Is there reason to value such humans outside our race?

I think it should be obvious that they bring something of value to the table:

A different way of life at the biological level.

And, of course, yes, if they deny us our right to territory, their net value may be negative just as it is questionable to keep around cultures of Smallpox.

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 02:05 | #

silver: “Why not? Don’t answer if you can’t contain yourself.”

What if we try to ‘hammer out a deal’ but they won’t listen or refuse. What then? What if revolutionary violence were the only solution to saving the White race? Would you support said? Yes or no. Give me a straight answer. If you refuse to answer directly I’ll have definitive proof you are not dealing in good faith. So what is your answer?

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 02:08 | #

And when another’s mere presence is sufficient to constitute “aggression,”

Nonconsentual territorial occupation is aggression under international law as well as civil and criminal law.

Taking defensive action against aggression may involve the tactic of “retaliation” (subject to the question of proportionality) or the tactic of “terrorism” or the tactic of retreat, etc.—all legitimate under international, civil and criminal law.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 02:09 | #

James,

Respectability has no greater ally than justice. In so far as it is possible, we must receive retrospective justice for the trespasses done against us. The “killer” cannot expect a pat on the head and a cheery goodbye. He must know that he will receive justice.

Justice for white separationists has to be based on status quo ante property rights. The appeal, then, is not to the good nature of the guy with the gun, as you appear to surmise, but to a principle that stands outside prejudice, outside self-interest, and commands universal respect.

Does that slice Midas’ handiwork?

Posted by danielj on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 02:09 | #

Destroy all biological competition.

That was easy!

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 02:24 | #

Justice for white separationists has to be based on status quo ante property rights.

But here’s the problem with “justice” when dealing with animals:

Animals cannot conceive of others having “property rights” in anything but an animal territory sense. Animal territory is basically whatever the animal wants the animal tries to get and either wins or loses—there is no real conception of “justice”—although a parrot or an anti-Euro multicult supremacist might be able to utter the word at its convenience.

As for the “status quo ante” the question is “ante what?”

1965?

1492?

There were certainly injustices committed as part of both migratory periods, albeit those committed consequent to 1492 are overblown and those committed consequent to 1965 are “celebrated”.

Posted by silver on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 03:16 | #

What if we try to ‘hammer out a deal’ but they won’t listen or refuse. What then? What if revolutionary violence were the only solution to saving the White race? Would you support said? Yes or no. Give me a straight answer. If you refuse to answer directly I’ll have definitive proof you are not dealing in good faith. So what is your answer?

Cap, I’ve said that (limited) violence will most likely prove necessary. But that presupposes a time when balkanization, whether legally sanctioned or not, is openly racial and violence done in the name of more permanent forms of separation is widely understood as such. Now isn’t even close to that time.

Of course, if you plan to kill everyone anyway, there’s little left to discuss. That certainly puts me in an awkward position.

I really don’t know what to make of this “kill everyone” business. I find it incredibly disappointing, to say the least. I can “see race” (and understand it) as clearly as anyone who’s ever seen it. But I just can’t muster anything close to the sort of racial rage required to kill people. And I’m not just saying that because I’m a racial outsider in a nordic land; I couldn’t muster it in lands where I’d be an insider, either. I’ve experienced racial others far too positively to wish death on them just for being different; it doesn’t even begin to compute.

You’re probably aware of my disdain for Islam (the religion, culture and civilization). Many times I’ve considered “converting” (my heart wouldn’t be in it) to Judaism and going to Israel to fight the Arabs, since that country takes their threat more seriously than anyone. And then I would be prepared to do my share of killing. But I’d never dream of wishing to genocide every Arab. And I’d want to do everything possible to reach a just settlement with them. That’s worlds away from the sort of insanity diamed and even you preach.

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 03:46 | #

I really don’t know what to make of this “kill everyone” business.

It’s really quite simple:

If Life’s Universal Warriors cannot break free to create carrying capacity, then Malthusian law applies.

Posted by Joe on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 04:28 | #

Ground Coverage Operator’s idea is the single most important thing we need: an explicitly pro-white political party in America. Until we have that, we really can’t do anything but talk. How hard can it be to do this? Every single European country has at least one nationalist political party. Most have more than one. What is wrong with Americans. We either want to support the GOP or become terrorists.

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 04:41 | #

Every single European country has at least one nationalist political party. Most have more than one. What is wrong with Americans.

The voting system is different here. It’s doomed to be a two party system. Changing the voting system is virtually impossible because the legislators were elected under the current system.

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:42 | #

Joe: “We either want to support the GOP or become terrorists.”

If enough of our people are not willing to come to us when the time comes that they have no where else to go then we might as well throw in the towel right now. When they do, we must be able to tell them how/ why things went wrong and how to fix them. A political party seems to me a necessity, primarily as a means of establishing a cohesive group strategy to resist our dispossession and ultimate destruction. But, under the current electoral rules, and with our minority status a certainty within maybe ten years, I see hardly any hope of a political solution. Our enemies will not let us go. They will not let us secede. So, we must be prepared to take the fight to them. Our ‘White People’s Party’ must have an armed para-military wing (I might even go so far as to say that that is its raison d’etre) For those White men of able body, admittance into the party must be contingent upon submitting to ideological indoctrination, military training and discipline within the command structure of the Party. They will do it in exchange for protection or be denied it.

Why so harsh? Because this is not a fucking game. Besides, who will follow us anyways unless we can offer them a muscular, realistic vision of victory. I think a weltenschaung is being forged near completion here, before our eyes. What we need now is courage.

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:51 | #

silver: “But I’d never dream of wishing to genocide every Arab. And I’d want to do everything possible to reach a just settlement with them.”

Nor I, yet I will not leave it to the caprice of the good will of alien people to grant my people their existence. The historical/scientific exidence overwhemingly suggests it is too great a risk. The White race must occupy the top slot of power globally, for its own benefit and continued existence, and indeed for the good of all man kind. When it comes to exterminating all the non-Whites, those who advocate it can count me out, and in fact I stand between them and their objectives.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:30 | #

James,

Your ground-rules are altogether too reductionist. Animal competition requires no legitimisation, only an outcome that might not cost one or other party its life. That is why, in the struggle for the fittest mate, territorial combat is adaptive behaviour among animals.

But Man dreams of travel to the stars, invents penicillin, composes Spem in Alium. He is capable of Hiroshima, and he experiences the emotion of compassion before suffering. It is likely that he alone can pursue a dysgenic course to his own cost. He alone makes war but, because it is dysgenic, requires something he calls legitimation.

With respectable people it’s a question, always, of legitimation. It doesn’t matter whether the criminal acts “naturally” like an animal, and takes what he wants only because he wants to and he can. The criminal act is not legitimated by its success. The criminal act is never legitimate in the eyes of a respectable man.

Property right is not the only metric beside which the deeds of your mass-murderer can be judged. There is the right of self-defence. There is the UN Declaration of September 07. There is the Geneva Convention of 1947 on genocide.

By whatever means legitimation for Europeans is procured, once it is there is only one road open. Force, deadly if necessary, is part of that legitimation. Justice must be done.

Rather than trying to cut the Gordian knot, as if the problem was all but insuperable, I think we should be talking here about releasing tension. What has actually happened to Europe’s peoples is that their natural defence mechanism has, in various ways, been jammed. A process normal to human populations everywhere has, in our lands, been arrested. This state of arrest is steadily building up a head of steam for resolution. Our function is to help it blow (not the same thing as certain nationalist political entities which may have the function of an escape valve).

Whether the “mass-murderer” is the elites of the Establishment, Jewish ethno-aggressors, liberal idealists and social engineers, or the transgressing minorities themselves, he relies heavily on the force of his own moralism to maintain the state of arrest. Maybe that moralism - a criminal morality - is our Gordian Knot, to use your formulation. That is what we can cut with an appeal to justice.

Posted by silver on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:34 | #

It’s really quite simple:

If Life’s Universal Warriors cannot break free to create carrying capacity, then Malthusian law applies.

I was talking about after you’ve “broken free” (if we’re talking about the same thing). Then it’s even simpler. The rest are idiots; that they’ll overpopulate and die goes almost without saying. I’m not bothered by it, to be frank. But why not leave it to them? If they can make it out alive, good on them. Why would you want to kill them? It doesn’t make sense to me.

Posted by Dave Johns on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:57 | #

Liberals clinically mad, concludes top psychiatrist
Eminent doctor makes case leftist ideology is a mental disorder

————————————————————————————————————————
Posted: November 12, 2008
6:33 pm Eastern

WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.

“Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded,” says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, “The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.” “Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.”

While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to “the vast right-wing conspiracy.”

For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.

Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by both Barack Obama and his Democratic primary opponent Hillary Clinton can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

(Story continues below)

“A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do,” he says. “A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation’s citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do.”

Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;

augmenting primitive feelings of envy;

rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.
“The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind,” he says. “When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious.”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:52 | #

A very significant proportion of liberalism’s ringleaders do it consciously in order to destroy society. Therefore, the view of liberals as well-intentioned fools is, though partly right, partly wrong: lots of the leadership are ill-intentioned and no fools but know precisely they’re destroying society, which is their conscious goal: they HATE our society when it’s normal, and are only happy when they’ve sickened and degraded it. Then they feel joy, some of the most satisfying of their lives.

The ones who fit this particular analysis most closely are liberalism’s diaspora Jewish leaders, the society in question being Euro society which they feel excluded from and therefore want to destroy out of pure jealousy.

It’s as if you’re hoping to be admitted as a member of an extremely attractive, desirable, prestigious, much admired private club but know there’s no chance whatsover that can happen: you’re to be permanently excluded. Jealousy will make you wish for that club’s destruction.

Our society, Euro society, is that club. The one longing for membership while judging it’ll never be conferred on him is the Jew. That person’s hatred of that club and wish for its destruction is the Jew’s hatred of our society and wish for its destruction.

A big part of what’s going on is that simple.

Posted by silver on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 16:04 | #

Oh, I can relate to that, Scrooby. The knowledge that, if nothing is done, gutter trash like you and many other uberhaters will suffer excruciating psychological pain is mind-blowingly satisfying. I don’t at all wish that nothing be done; it’s just that if it isn’t it, as tragic as that will be, your suffering, you execrable, obdurate filth, will at least partly make up for it. I really can’t state that forcefully enough.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 16:26 | #

Wow, and that last was one of my milder comments! I’d hate to be around Silver when he reads some others of mine I could point out!

Posted by Dave Johns on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 16:27 | #

Silver, give it a rest!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jealousy will make you wish for that club’s destruction. —Fred Scrooby

That’s exactly right, Fred!

Ayn Rand described that condition quite accurately when she explained envy, or “Hatred of the Good for Being the Good”

Posted by silver on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:38 | #

Our society, Euro society, is that club. The one longing for membership while judging it’ll never be conferred on him is the Jew.

Quite. A “Story of Race and Inheritance” from an earlier age:

http://www.nysun.com/arts/the-making-of-benjamin-disraeli-adam-kirschs-new/86002/

Moreover, Benjamin Disraeli looked “un-English.” His luxuriant curls, Mediterranean complexion, and “intensely black eyes” made him feel different. The eponymous hero of his novel “Contarini Fleming” (1832), one of his many fictional characters who give voice his innermost feelings, remarks that there was “no similitude” between him and those around him. “Their blue eyes, their flaxen hair, and their white visages claimed no kindred with my Venetian countenance. Wherever I moved I looked around me, and beheld a race different from myself.”

That person’s hatred of that club and wish for its destruction is the Jew’s hatred of our society and wish for its destruction.

I don’t wish to destroy you. I wish to help you, regardless of personal costs. Can you name another that feels that way? The Jewish heroes you keep reminding us of—Ben Pesach, Iliana Mercer (!)—don’t.

That’s why I wonder about you, Scrooby. I wonder a great deal whether there’s anything genuinely human in you. Or whether race has gone to your head so thoroughly that you’ve removed yourself from the ranks of moral men. You can despair all you like about Holocaustianity, but when sentiment such as that expressed on this very thread holds sway among you it’s ever so easy to believe the Germans could have done it—and not just six million, but sixty and six hundred million.

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:07 | #

GW writes: Your ground-rules are altogether too reductionist. Animal competition requires no legitimisation… (Man) alone makes war but, because it is dysgenic, requires something he calls legitimation…. Whether the “mass-murderer” is the elites of the Establishment, Jewish ethno-aggressors, liberal idealists and social engineers, or the transgressing minorities themselves, he relies heavily on the force of his own moralism to maintain the state of arrest. Maybe that moralism - a criminal morality - is our Gordian Knot, to use your formulation. That is what we can cut with an appeal to justice.

I would say he relies almost entirely on the force of his own moralism, and yes that is part the Gordian Knot that you seek to cut with an appeal to justice. The problem is justice is founded on morality so if you have criminals promulgating moralisms successfully, then you have nowhere to appeal for justice! The sword of justice is, itself, hidden along with the ends of the rope, in the Knot.

The criminal has defined self-defense as the worst of all moral breaches in one special case: Defense of Euromen and related identities is equated with all evils of the world. Even criminal gangs may be morally defended before Euromen may contemplate self-defense. So the attack is on morality itself. But it is worse than that: Even if we appeal to such universals as “carrying capacity creation” to overcome the attack on Euromen, the resort is to attack the morality of being human in competition with Earth-as-victim. Never mind that this misanthropy is only called forth when convenient to attack Euromen—it is still something with which we must contend. The criminals—indeed the animals posing as criminals—care not a whit that by parroting moralistic word complexes as evolutionary arms they may be dooming the entire Earth in their relentless quest for capturing the carrying capacity we have created. They will keep after the carrying capacity we have created until we, and possibly they, and possibly the Earth, are dead.

This is why my moral appeal in Life’s Universal Warriors transcends Earth:

It is from this perspective as life’s universal warriors that we might find the moral resolve to fight, and win, whatever wars, universal or mundane, we may need to fight within the constraints of our evolved weaknesses.

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:29 | #

silver, The Knot, writes: I was talking about after you’ve “broken free” (if we’re talking about the same thing).

We see here silver ignoring the entire premise, a premise that has been reiterated countless times. Of course, by continually blowing off the foundation of the conversation he ties it up. Yes, silver personifies the Gordian Knot.

Posted by a Finn on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:40 | #

One of the problems in American WN scene is all the fantasizing about the coming war, arming this or that group, waiting for the supreme moment when all the whites suddenly gather together; etc.

It would be wise to quit those.

Few are offering soup from field kitchens to whites and talking to them sensible things; arranging good natured events to families; participating in all kinds of internet discussions with matter of fact logical view points; meeting other WNs regularly in cafeterias (no alcohol or only little) and planning for the future; participating and influencing local associations; helping alternative parties tenaciously with concrete work and donations, whatever the results at the moment; arranging sports or intellectual hobbies to local youth; using intelligent comedy to oppose the establishment; creating useful networks, both in real life and in internet; etc.

Anyway, in Finland the party critisizing immigration increased it’s support five fold in recent municipal council elections, despite the best efforts of the reactionary parties and the media. The Candidate I voted for, Jussi Halla-aho, Ph.D. received 18th largest number of votes nationally and was easily elected. Our True Finns party received 5,3% of the vote. This a good start.

After the elections Green party (When it was established, half of it’s founders were ex-stalinists, and they have still large part of the power in it) and media has attacked us hysterically, and thus made mistakes at every turn. We have profited greatly from their mistakes. Our sites are filled to their capacity with new participants and we receive lots of popular support. Some women say they have put printed Halla-aho fan pictures to their walls. Finnish politics are interesting now.

Posted by a Finn on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 19:12 | #

Short introduction of Jussi Halla-aho:

http://jussi.halla-aho.com/indeng.html

In his pages there is one article in English. Most of them deal with immigration and immigrants:

http://www.halla-aho.com/scripta/inter_arma_eng.html

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 19:32 | #

One of the problems in American WN scene…

...is a system of representative government that by its nature excludes any representation by third parties—unlike Parliamentary systems.

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962
35th president of US 1961-1963 (1917 - 1963)

Posted by Dave Johns on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 20:17 | #

“Promote then as an object of primary importance, Institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.”—George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

Incurably-ignorant-masses or ‘media malpractice’ - or both? You decide.

Check it out:-

http://www.howobamagotelected.com/

Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:05 | #

...is a system of representative government that by its nature excludes any representation by third parties—unlike Parliamentary systems.

Canada’s Westminster model provides multiple party representation, however, the only group that is not marginally represented is ethnically based, the Bloc Quebecois.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:53 | #

The problem is justice is founded on morality so if you have criminals promulgating moralities successfully, then you have nowhere to appeal for justice!

Never was a truer word spoken.

As the Mayor of Dresden, Ontario argued, “[t]his is a democratic country…. You can’t force anyone to serve Negroes.”

“Meanwhile, the issue of non-discriminatory business licensing was finally put to the town voters in a referendum in December of 1949. It was defeated by a vote of 517 to 108, and the town became a lightning-rod which attracted a fire-storm of attention and criticism. As a Toronto Globe and Mail editorial put it, “The decision brings shame to Dresden and to all Ontario.”

The pursuit of freedom to associate, to chose, to exclude was framed as immoral and shameful. In fact the the very fundamental nature of grass roots democracy was framed as racism and those who fought for that freedom were racists. Where’s the rest button? This must be a bizarre perverse dream.

Posted by a Finn on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:14 | #

“...is a system of representative government that by its nature excludes any representation by third parties—unlike Parliamentary systems.”

- But there have been third parties. Couldn’t they grow more? They have at least been the decisive factors between republicans and democrats. What are the obstacles? Give me e.g. a link to a site you consider to be good on this matter.

Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:53 | #

TWO-PARTY NATION
America today is without question a two-party country. But it isn’t that way because public opinion has demanded it, because it is more convenient to have only two parties, or because there is any inherent benefit to the country.

America is a two-party nation because the politicians have used the force of government to make it so.

The Republicans and Democrats have imposed the two-party system on us with five major types of laws. These laws not only place direct obstacles to electoral breakthroughs, they also affect the way the media perceives us and the way the public perceives us — thus creating three layers of resistance to Libertarian breakthroughs.

http://harrybrowne.org/2000/WhatWe’reUpAgainst.htm#BallotAccess

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:02 | #

Actually I should have said “proportional representation parliamentary systems such as Finland’s”:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_Finland#Ruling_majority

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary

The term parliamentary system does not mean that a country is ruled by different parties in coalition with each other. Such multi-party arrangements are usually the product of an electoral system known as proportional representation. Many parliamentary countries, especially those that use “first past the post” voting, have governments composed of one party. However, parliamentary systems in India and continental Europe do use proportional representation, and tend to produce election results in which no single party has a majority of seats. Proportional representation in a non-parliamentary system does not have this result.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:05 | #

Once the first wildebeest made its move, most of the herd would follow.

Incumbent in that is a protective shield. The power of the shield is enormous. Any wildebeest making a move will be shot down like a sniveling dirty dog (Randy Weaver or Waco).

Posted by a Finn on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 01:08 | #

Thank you for the links. I answer tomorrow.

Posted by Guest on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 01:31 | #

But how can motives ever be completely known? Prof. MacDonald sets a difficult test: “The best evidence that individuals have really ceased to have a Jewish identity is if they choose a political option that they perceive as clearly not in the interest of Jews as a group. In the absence of a clearly perceived conflict with Jewish interests, it remains possible that different political choices among ethnic Jews are only differences in tactics for how best to achieve Jewish interests.”

This standard may seem unduly harsh—until it is applied to white Gentiles. Third-World immigration, affirmative action, anti-discrimination laws, and forced integration are clearly not in the interests of whites, yet many whites embrace them, thus demonstrating how completely they have abandoned their racial identity.

Finally, Prof. MacDonald raises the disturbing possibility that some Jews, because of centuries of conflict with Gentiles, actively hate Gentile society and consciously wish to destroy it: “a fundamental motivation of Jewish intellectuals involved in social criticism has simply been hatred of the Gentile-dominated power structure perceived as anti-Semitic.” He describes the 19th century German-Jewish poet Heinrich Heine as “using his skill, reputation and popularity to undermine the intellectual confidence of the established order.”

http://www.heretical.com/miscellx/culturec.html

As far as the lemming Whites, to call them WHITE is for the word to lose all real meaning, they can reap what they have so diligently sown. I believe that we, the WN, the NS, are the evolutionary vanguard of a new species.

We, ourselves, alone.
Bad Genes = Bad people.
Do you REALLY want them to survive?
With their coarseness, their mean spirited natures, their egotistic fantasies of superiority, their materialism, their lack of manners, their bourgeois affected characters?

Well, I’m afraid that those who are corrupt will stay that way until the end, but many of those who just haven’t been able to bring themselves to face the unpleasantness of a solution will come to accept the proposition that the destruction of this society and the destruction of most of its population is an infinitely better outcome—infinitely better—than the final triumph of the Jews and the final destruction of our race. They will come to accept that as the Jews continue their feeding frenzy, continue becoming more arrogant and more visible,continue destroying everything which our people always have treasured more than ease and comfort and safety. The best of our people will come to understand that it is infinitely better for their children and their grandchildren to have a hard future, a future which requires them to rebuild everything, than no future at all.

William Pierce—11-27-1999

Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 01:42 | #

Desmond Jones: “Incumbent in that is a protective shield. The power of the shield is enormous. Any wildebeest making a move will be shot down like a sniveling dirty dog (Randy Weaver or Waco).”

As long as our enemies command the minds and loyalties of a critical mass of our people secession is doomed to failure, is suicidal and therefore moot. To what lengths will these evil psychopaths not go to keep their cash cow tethered in the barn? It is said by some here that the secessionists will have platoon quality fighting men and equipment (i.e., fully-automatic rifles and fifty cals.). Contrasted with what? Tanks? Air-strikes? Chemical weapons (don’t put it past them for a second)?

And don’t put it past the lemmings to fall upon their seceding kindred with a ruthlessness that they would reserve for no other. Our enemies will tell them they are annihilating “Nazis” who deserve to be exterminated like, well, the way “Nazis” exterminate people. “Sometimes you have got to fight fire with fire, you know how it goes.”

They will never release their grip on our people until they rightly fear that to not so do will mean they swing from lamp posts.

Posted by danielj on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 01:53 | #

Silver: You make much better comments when you ignore Fred. Please do so for the sake of the blog.

Fred: I didn’t use the word “ignore” because you deserve to be ignored. I used the word because Silver is incapable of engaging you properly.

Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:02 | #

Guest: “As far as the lemming Whites, to call them WHITE is for the word to lose all real meaning, they can reap what they have so diligently sown.”

Aside from being repugnant, that tact is impractical, we need numbers - enough to win in a knock-down, drag-out fight to the finish.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:33 | #

James,

I’m a stubborn, last-ditch sort of bastard, and I don’t want to be too quick to judgement of judgement! The question, perhaps, is to what extent justice is a universally recognised standard free of moral puritanism. If there is a workable basis which commands universal respect, then we can likely force the issue on those terms.

But it wil be mighty difficult. Once again I have spent the day exploring the liberal mind - possibly the fruitcake one of Dave’s very funny link, I don’t know, but anyway the one that comments on the Guardian.

It was the right of Europe’s peoples to survive that my Guardianista friends most railed against. They tried repeatedly to deny the existence of our people with the usual appeal to mongrelism. They tried to deny the meaning of demographic change with the usual appeal to previous migrations into Britain. They tried to deny the genocidal consequence of demographic change claiming it, hardly originally, to be histrionics.

They are amazingly shallow and inflexible in their thought, which we already knew. But that shallowness and inflexibility is a strength, too, because they can’t consider dangerous ideas. Even the most wooly and accessible reference to ethnic interests was met with a silence I can only construe as incomprehension. One rash fellow declared his willingness to see us die out rather than him have to sacrifice his political principles! And this despite the fact that I was busy before and after labelling him as a genocidalist!

It was a good thread. But one thing came through loud and clear:-

I spoke consistently, as is my wont, of the great and pressing need of justice for the English. My opponents did not respond to that except to reify the injustice done by the West to the poor of the Third World. So this is the deal: historical injustice in the Third World and, I suppose, the affront of slavery trumps or blocks out any consideration of the West’s native peoples from existing at all.

Now, you are right to say “he relies almost entirely on the force of his own moralism”. But this is hyper-moralism and it cannot be stable. Why? Because there is no moral or logical foundation to the assertion, nothing connecting past Western sins and the non-consideration of Western Man as a living being. The one does not lead to the other.

Plainly, the liberal cannot argue that our children must pay with their collective lives for the alleged sins of their great, great, great grandfathers. At this point the game is done, and Justice’s sword comes into our hands. Now we are free to wield it.

Posted by Meandering on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:28 | #

“They are amazingly shallow and inflexible in their thought, which we already knew. But that shallowness and inflexibility is a strength, too, because they can’t consider dangerous ideas.”

Sounds like a lot of the people on this board, starting from the top down.

Bowery and Silver excluded.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 05:07 | #

It was the right of Europe’s peoples to survive ...

The problem is that its hard to prove genocide when the British white population increased, in absolute numbers, 1-2% over the last ten years.

Posted by John on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:58 | #

Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.

“Mental illness” is itself a communist concept.

Whether the “mass-murderer” is the elites of the Establishment, Jewish ethno-aggressors, liberal idealists and social engineers, or the transgressing minorities themselves, he relies heavily on the force of his own moralism to maintain the state of arrest. Maybe that moralism - a criminal morality - is our Gordian Knot, to use your formulation. That is what we can cut with an appeal to justice.

At the top they’re equally cynical as they are power driven, imo.

Posted by Dave Johns on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:01 | #

“Sounds like a lot of the people on this board, starting from the top down.
[S]ilver excluded.”— Meandering

I’m sure JWH is dancing in the air over that statement? LOL

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:34 | #

Ian Jobling doesn’t think the Obama administration is going to be a total disaster on all fronts:

http://inverted-world.com/index.php/articles/articles/barack_obama_radical_or_windbag/

I have the same feeling that it won’t. Of course it will on most fronts, as was the Bush administration and as a McInsane administration would have been.

Specifically, Jobling doesn’t think the Jews and communists who are going to be the ones running The Magic Negro administration will push for an amnesty for mystery meat illegally in the country, whereas <strike>McAsshole</strike> excuse me, McAnus (I always try to keep things polite and use proper language) would have made that his number one priority right off the bat. And of course the particular faction of Jews who use Obama as their front man are somewhat less likely to launch a full-scale thermonuclear sneak-attack on Iran a microsecond after the inauguration than the ones who use McFilth as theirs. So that’s a plus. Of course it was clear starting way before Election Day we were going to get all the society-perverting, nation-destroying federal judges and Supreme Court appointments the Jews could possibly want with either administration, so there’s absolutely no difference in that regard between the two <strike>hominids</strike> men.( * ) Finally, if we’re going to take the “glass half-full” view rather than the “glass half-empty,” let’s all admit that the Magic Negro is personally a more decent and respectable human( * ) than the unspeakably vile sub-humanoid filth Bush, Clinton, Cheney, and Mc[Unspeakable]. (And as for the Jews who are running both shows from behind the scenes, you really and truly have to hand it to them: they’ve taken parasitism to whole new heights.)
______

( * uhhhhh ..... oh forget it, let’s keep things polite ...)

Posted by silver on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:52 | #

The criminal has defined self-defense as the worst of all moral breaches in one special case: Defense of Euromen and related identities is equated with all evils of the world. Even criminal gangs may be morally defended before Euromen may contemplate self-defense. So the attack is on morality itself. But it is worse than that: Even if we appeal to such universals as “carrying capacity creation” to overcome the attack on Euromen, the resort is to attack the morality of being human in competition with Earth-as-victim. Never mind that this misanthropy is only called forth when convenient to attack Euromen—it is still something with which we must contend. The criminals—indeed the animals posing as criminals—care not a whit that by parroting moralistic word complexes as evolutionary arms they may be dooming the entire Earth in their relentless quest for capturing the carrying capacity we have created. They will keep after the carrying capacity we have created until we, and possibly they, and possibly the Earth, are dead.

Is that what I “personify,” Bowery?

I honestly don’t know what you’re talking about. Try being less cryptic. It can’t be just me. I defy any reader to explain how I personify the Gordian Knot you allude to.

Go ahead, defend. Do much, much more than defend. Off end, deport, resettle, relocate, kill even. But why be an asshole on top? Everything about garden variety WN reeks of assholism, stinks to high heaven of assholism. You’ll never capture a critical mass of white hearts and minds with your assholism.

I’m sure JWH is dancing in the air over that statement? LOL

Who cares what that shiteating asshole thinks? Are you that goddam thick, Dave Johns, that you can’t understand what a pure, unadulterated asshole that vermin is? Are you that damn thick that you can’t realize the only reason he can’t fairly characterize my position is that I mock his absurd attempts to whiten himself with his “tests”? That the whole reason he’s such a grouch is that he feels vulnerable about his whiteness and feels compelled to savage and ridicule anyone and everyone even a smidgeon less white than what his exacting standards require, even though doing so is not remotely required for advancing a pro-white agenda, and is, in fact, counterproductive? Are you that damn thick? Sadly, I think the answer is yes, you are that damn thick. Try this, Davey boy: think for yourself. If you can pinpoint anything I say (now, not one year ago—which is the only thing shiteater has to go on) which you think compromises white interests, let’s have you bring it up. Otherwise, pay attention to what I actually say; not to what self-interested shiteaters claim I say.

Fred: I didn’t use the word “ignore” because you deserve to be ignored. I used the word because Silver is incapable of engaging you properly.

Jesus Christ, danielj: I him or him me?

What the hell’s there to “engage”? It’s all “Jews”, “mystery meat” and “race-replacement” repeated a thousand times a day. That’s his metier. That’s what race-on-the-brain assholism is all about. It’s never been able to move beyond that. And if he has his way, it never will. That’s what race-on-the-brain assholism does to a person. It reduces a man to a race-on-the-brain asshole and leaves him there, paralyzed, no longer able to function as a moral actor or rational life-form. He’ll end his days on a rocking chair, staring blankly into the distance, muttering quietly—the delirium having subsided with age—about “jews” and “race-replacement.”

Posted by Armor on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:40 | #

If GuessedWorker doesn’t believe in direct censorship, I suggest to try a system where messages authored by anyone with Silver in his name are displayed with the letters in reverse order…
For example, Posted by silver on Wednesday would become yadsendeW no revlis yb detsoP. In that way, people would no longer waste time accidentally replying to his messages.

Posted by silver on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:49 | #

Could they help me pick out some curtains that go with the couch and loveseat?

I wouldn’t be surprised.

Seriously, I haven’t seen much in the way of half-baked verdicts on other topics around here. You must be thinking of another website.

Well, yes I am. Sounds to me as though you think that invalidates my point.

Look, anon, there’s no talking to these people in general. That should be pretty obvious. But there’s even less talking to them when it comes to “human nature.” They know it all. They know it all because they’ve got their hands on some revolutionary knowledge about heredity and they’ve combined it with the equally revolutionary notion that their race has a right to defend itself. And that does it. There’s no telling them anything after that. The effect is diminished at the higher levels, but it’s present even there. GW’s a good example. I don’t disagree with him on anything substantial (I certainly pass Kevin Mac’s “test” for jews, even though I’m not jewsih), but there’s not a chance I could get a word in sideways on peripheral issues. And he’s about as fair as it gets. The rest, particularly the “historians” (the nazi nostalgists), are far worse.

Posted by silver on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:53 | #

If GuessedWorker doesn’t believe in direct censorship, I suggest to try a system where messages authored by anyone with Silver in his name are displayed with the letters in reverse order…
For example, Posted by silver on Wednesday would become yadsendeW no revlis yb detsoP. In that way, people would no longer waste time accidentally replying to his messages.

No wonder you don’t realize how far off in la-land WN is. A fish typically isn’t aware it’s “in water.”

Posted by Frum Watch on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:31 | #

http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article/the_end_of_frum/

http://sounds1.neilrogers.com/sounds/old/023.mp3

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:36 | #

You keep criticizing the wrong people, Silver. Why aren’t you over at DailyKos of HuffingtonPost criticizing the perps of the genocide? You keep criticizing the victims. Why aren’t you confronting Abe Foxman and Morris Disease as vigorously as you confront us? Why aren’t you lambasting the Jewish press empires and Jewish media barons for starting this war in the first place? Why spend all your time here attacking us who never wanted it and have no control over it? In 1915 you would have been tagging along hectoring the columns of fleeing Armenians, screaming at them to be less prejudiced, less racist, less “nazi,” while never addressing one word to the Turks who were in the process of genociding them.

MR.com is the wrong blog for you, Silver. Why do you come here? You hate our approach. Good. Go away then. Oh, and before you leave could you post copies of some of the indignant comments you’ve surely left at Abe Foxman’s site (or wherever the perps let people post comments)? If you’re as concerned about what’s going on as you claim surely you must have posted TONS of attacks on them over there, way more than you’ve posted here attacking victims only trying to defend themselves, especially knowing as you do that the minute someone gets THEM to stop, WE all pack up and go home.

Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:15 | #

silver: “The rest are idiots [non-Whites with low IQs]; that they’ll overpopulate and die goes almost without saying. I’m not bothered by it, to be frank.”

Silver is “not bothered” by the prospect of billions of non-Whites starving to death. Silver, you are an asshole.

BTW, my position is no different from yours, except I advocate protection (e.g., armed guards) of biodiversity while the “rest of those idiots” will be after all the bush meat they can get.

Welcome to the League of Assholes.

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:41 | #

GW writes: Plainly, the liberal cannot argue that our children must pay with their collective lives for the alleged sins of their great, great, great grandfathers.

If we can inherit from our forefathers then what is to exclude inheriting debts of our estate? Of we exclude debts then how can we claim to inherit credits such as legitimate occupancy of territory?

This is an accounting problem and, as we have seen with the recent financial debacles, as well as questionable accounts of history, the ultimate question for those who seek “justice” is who will hold the accountants to account?

Posted by Dave Johns on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:16 | #

silver: “Who cares what that [JHW] thinks?”

Well, my intent was not to provide you with a launching pad in which to attack JHW.

But you ask: “Who cares?” I for one, do. Afterall, he IS an expert in his field of science, you know.

What I can’t understand about JHW, is why he places so much importance on what your opinions are. In a way, I find that in itself comical.

“Are you that damn thick that you can’t realize the only reason he can’t fairly characterize my position is that I mock his absurd attempts to whiten himself with his “tests”?That the whole reason he’s such a grouch is that he feels vulnerable about his whiteness and feels compelled to savage and ridicule anyone and everyone even a smidgeon less white than what his exacting standards”

That’s laughable! Especially coming from you, silver. It seems to me, you, by your own admissions, are the one that feels vulnerable about your whiteness. Afterall, why would you be soooooo shaken because Scimitar and Northerner said (paraphrasing): Only people from NE Europe can be considered white. Yep! I guess that settles it for ol’ silver. He now has proof we are ALL a bunch of amoral homicidal maniacs out to subjugate the Meds - even though many of us are Meds, or a mixture of Nord and Med (myself included).

“Are you that damn thick? Sadly, I think the answer is yes, you are that damn thick.”

Awh gee, that reeeeeally hurt me! LMFAO

“Try this, Davey boy: think for yourself.”

If I ever want any advice from you, silver, I’ll just beat it out of you!

” ... pay attention to what I actually say; not to what self-interested shiteaters claim I say.”

Actually, I do; unlike many, I find much of what you say very useful ... that is when you are not being goaded into a maelstrom of fury by your critics. Also, the sooner you get over the fact you don’t posses the ideal Nordic phenotype, and accept yourself the way you acually are, the less mentally-torchered you’ll be.

Cheers,

Posted by Guest on Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:58 | #

Fred this is one of the rare times I have to disagree with you

let’s all admit that the Magic Negro is personally a more decent and respectable human

Posted by danielj on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:30 | #

Fred: I didn’t use the word “ignore” because you deserve to be ignored. I used the word because Silver is incapable of engaging you properly.

Jesus Christ, danielj: I him or him me?

What the hell’s there to “engage”? It’s all “Jews”, “mystery meat” and “race-replacement” repeated a thousand times a day. That’s his metier. That’s what race-on-the-brain assholism is all about. It’s never been able to move beyond that. And if he has his way, it never will. That’s what race-on-the-brain assholism does to a person. It reduces a man to a race-on-the-brain asshole and leaves him there, paralyzed, no longer able to function as a moral actor or rational life-form. He’ll end his days on a rocking chair, staring blankly into the distance, muttering quietly—the delirium having subsided with age—about “jews” and “race-replacement.”

I thought it was clear and I apologize if it wasn’t. The statement I directed at Fred was a way to ask him not to take offense at the statement I directed to you. Nothing more.

All I meant was that the two of you should avoid talking to each other. Nothing good seems to come of it.

Do you really care if Fred has race-on-the-brain?

I like punk music, really expensive organic restaurants, red wine, learning to fix my car, the Ruby programming language, stealing Gideon’s Bibles out of every hotel I stay in and the Dragon Ball Z cartoon but that it wasn’t what MR is about. What gets you fired up Silver? All you seem to have on the brain is Fred. You are at your best when you ignore him.

That is enough of me diverting the thread. Email me if you would like to respond.

Posted by silver on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:47 | #

danielj, the reason I care is that’s all “white nationalism” is, a sad, disgusting, deeply unattractive joke, filled to the brim with the filthiest anti-human creeps on the planet. That’s why it’s gotten nowhere and that’s why it will not go anywhere. It’s the deepset, unthinking assholism, and not jews, not the liberal media, not the church, that is most responsible for people rejecting racial politics. It shouldn’t be any of these things. Something so right shouldn’t be so deeply repulsive.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:24 | #

Notice he’s still not directing his complaints to the ones doing the genocide. Bizarrely, he directs his complaints to the powerless victims of the genocide.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:31 | #

May we see the letters you’ve written to Abe Foxman condemning his genocide of us, Silver?

(I’ve said already and I’ll repeat: taking the totality of Silver’s commentary here [and elsewhere that I’ve run across] into account, I’ve seen no evidence, zero evidence, that he opposes the forced race-replacement of the European peoples. No evidence whatsoever.)

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:36 | #

James: the ultimate question for those who seek “justice” is who will hold the accountants to account?

I think the accountant has got his apples in his oranges column here. Birthright to the English ancestral homeland is severally received. A spot of unpleasantness in Amritsar long, long ago is not. Likewise, the birthright of white Americans to the land their forefathers made is severally received. The responsibility for slavery in 17th and 18th century America is not.

Justice can operate.

100

Posted by Nonesuch on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 02:17 | #

danielj, the reason I care is that’s all “white nationalism” is, a sad, disgusting, deeply unattractive joke, filled to the brim with the filthiest anti-human creeps on the planet. That’s why it’s gotten nowhere and that’s why it will not go anywhere. It’s the deepset, unthinking assholism, and not jews, not the liberal media, not the church, that is most responsible for people rejecting racial politics. It shouldn’t be any of these things. Something so right shouldn’t be so deeply repulsive.

Obviously, the repulsive freaks here at MR are beyond hope. You can’t reform them, I guess! And for someone who is so fed up with these disgusting wack jobs, you spend quite a bit of time here, it seems. For someone who has such great ideas, you could always start your own website. Maybe sick fucks like Scrooby could go there and maybe learn something. Consider it charity work. I await you posting the link…

101

Posted by weston on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 02:28 | #

the reason I care is that’s all “white nationalism” is, a sad, disgusting, deeply unattractive joke, filled to the brim with the filthiest anti-human creeps on the planet.

Let me get this straight. You a.) claim that you sincerely oppose the forced race-replacement of European peoples, yet b.) think that everyone else that does so is an “anti-human creep” and yet c.) choose to spend what must amount to hours per day reading and posting on sites populated by these creeps. I know you think we’re vile, anti-human creeps, but you must also think we’re the most credulous people on the planet to believe all of that crap.

No wonder you don’t realize how far off in la-land WN is. A fish typically isn’t aware it’s “in water.”

You want to talk about no self-awareness? You’re the guy that came here as an anti-white Paki living in England, morphed into an anti-Anglo Serb living in Australia, and then turned into some sort of pro-Nordic Serb/Greek living in Thailand. Now all you do is post about how much white nationalists disgust you, while attacking Scrooby and Holliday. (I’ve probably missed a few of your incarnations, too). You cycle through online personas as if you were schizophrenic. Through it all, however, the one constant seems to be your hostility to white preservationism; as Fred noted, where is the evidence that you oppose the forced race-replacement of European peoples? I haven’t seen it, either. But you’ll continue to insist that you’re sincere, and go right back to attacking all WN as “disgusting”, while inserting gratuitous passive-aggressive attacks on JWH into every other post.

And you profess anger at the fact that some here (all, actually) don’t think you’re arguing in good faith. That is an EPIC lack of self-awareness on your part.

102

Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 03:03 | #

Kevin MacDonald, tonight, on Peter Shaenk’s show on Reason Radio Network said that the best case scenario moving forward for America, present trends persisting, is a multi-racial police state. The worst case scenario is is genocide, balkanization and secession. Perhaps a more “hardass” approach will be necessary?

If the worst case scenario comes to pass, if non-Whites start exterminating our people, the gloves must come off. In that case, we have nothing to lose by taking back everything that has been stolen from us by whatever means necessary.

Victory, at whatever the cost to them, at whatever the cost to us, will be ours.

103

Posted by Lurker on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 03:21 | #

Re Silver.

I still take my cue from JWH.

104

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:23 | #

silver, you’ve had your time.

105

Posted by a Finn on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:55 | #

Re. There are real obstacles to third parties in Usa. Suggestions:

* Use the obstacles as springboards. Make them essential part of your politics. Say to voters regularly e.g.: “It is the way for the two parties to monopolize power, and take your opportunities away from you. Today you essentially have no choice, they have robbed you blind. We will advocate efficiently multiparty politics and give it maximum publicity at every opportunity. Also we will shift the balance of vote between them, forcing them to adopt issues we advocate. We are your power against this unfair, crooked system.”

* Compensate the extra fees and signatures etc. required with hard work. The harder your activists work for the elections, the more dedicated they become, the more important they see the policies they are advocating, the harder they are prepared to work in the future, the more loyal and tenacious they become (The effect of gruelling initiation rites). You turn the obstacles to your advantage.

* The big parties utilize mass politics and media and they have more resources in it. Fight especially where you are the strongest compared to the corrupted parties. Create locally stronger and more personal networks and nationally more loose networks. Know better the local communities, local politics and their needs. Listen and talk to local people more, shake their hands more. Offer them better food when campaigning. Arrange e.g. funnier events, mocking the static parties with good taste. Find and invest especially in people who are neglected or not adressed by mass politics (Long tail of the Gaussian curve). Create policies that address local peoples needs better and more accurately than mass politics can, but still fit into the national agenda. The national agenda must be resilient to allow this. Coordinate the local policies.

* Create local and national discussion sites where there is often links to outside popular and relevant discussions and swarm them. Repeatedly visit important sites. Be polite, talk matter of factly and be intelligent. No nutty things. In debates alternate between two approaches; scientific authority, with sources and bibliographies, longer texts; shorter more concise texts, easy to remember sentences, parables that evoke emotions and create memories (but don’t exaggerate too much, preserve the matter of fact general feeling of the text). Scientific approach shows your ability and authority. The more concise method with emotions increases motivation, memorization and ignites to action. Try to win debates, but don’t care at all whether your debating partner converts or not. He has often committed to his position by debating you and would lose his face by admitting defeat (there are also additional psychological reasons), so no matter how lousy he is, he will mostly pretend to be the winner or at least not to be the loser. You are debating only for the audience, who don’t participate in your debate. They will see who wins. The concise emotional approach is weighted before elections. Be tenacious in the political scene, you are not opportunistic transient phenomena. This is important in your ability to convince the voters and subvert the media’s misinformation. Link often and everywhere.

Your sites should contain anything from lay to scientific information, moderated comments, entertainment, comedy, music, videos, interesting links, news, advertisements of your events (e.g. civilized meetings in restaurants), dignified outward appearance (increases authority, e.g. comparable to well done prestigious university sites), etc.

Create own blogs to support the cause of central sites.

Use polite primers to action in all your texts, advertisements, meetings, etc. People need ignition. E.g. not: Cultural marxism in the congress: (link); but: Cultural marxism in the congress, click the link: (link). It increases considerably the number of people clicking the link.

Increase people’s commitment by influencing them to do something concrete, saying something publicly, filling and sending a coupon participating in political topic competition, signing a political petition, participating in political event, etc. This changes their self image. People interpret themselves to be primarily what they do. If actions and thoughts are contradictory, actions will generally change the thoughts.

* Advocate any policies that divide, transfer, take away or cancel national powers of the U.S and create a flow of power to local /state level, but are not against your interests. Use also the full extent of the law in local actions, businesses, communities, etc. to create this effect.

* Acquire visible activists to work with you and participate public events with you, who have different interests than you. This shows /underlines that you can advocate other people’s interests, not just your own interests (selfishness /altruism). They could also sometimes represent you to audiences that prefer to hear speeches from them.

* Concentrate the most of your political criticism to visible, obnoxious opponents (persons, institutions, organizations, etc.), who have disproportionately large ideological, psychological, media, vanguard or comparable power, but not necessarily the most direct political power. Criticize also others who deserve it to create balance. The two reactionary parties are almost one and the same, but aim more of your criticism to one of them.

* You must use both the avoidance of bad things, and positive goals /things and good mental images. The bad things are generally more compelling. People fear more losing ten dollars than they appreciate getting ten dollars. Bad things influence people generally more to participate in a group, coordinate their interests with it, increase the separation with the outgroup and oppose it. Bad things are or feel often more concrete.

Positive political goals /things and good mental images increases affection to the group and motivation, and makes it more acceptable and nice. The greatest motivation of humans is what they love; family, kin and extended family, etc.. Be sure to include them to your politics, facts and emotions with good taste. If there are people who are skillful at producing culture, utilize also their talents in expressing positive goals.

* Natural roles in groups and sites. Encourage people according to their predispositions and abilities. Encourage funny guys to become the good taste political comedy writers, scientist types to become the fountains of information, literary types to express emotions of politics and producing skillful political texts, charismatic persons to influence in real life, methodical and meticulous types to become organizers, etc. They can of course participate in other ways also.

* Install donation buttons to political sites. Sell products and /or services. Arrange donation campaigns.

* Study the weak and strong points of the two parties and their machines, and other political entities. Learn their skills. Contemplate how you can leverage and utilize more efficiently your fewer resources.

* Drop the not suitable topics, use consideration. This site contains many comments and articles that are not suitable to politics.

* Use vivid, but relevant topics to produce publicity and raise interest. At the same time direct people to your information sources. Distorted information in the media will turn to it’s opposite, when you constantly educate people to see that media lies, you are logical and can back your information. Criticize liberal media constantly. Encourage people to stop paying money to liberal media

- The two parties are Goljats with feet of clay. You are the Davids.

106

Posted by a Finn on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:58 | #

The person who wrote the lyrics to this song is likely to have known silver or a person resembling him:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7pQpNx-F4

107

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:50 | #

a Finn, your advice would be touchingly naive if it weren’t so arrogant. You did not understand the links I sent you, you have not looked seriously at the third party efforts such as the Ron Paul’s efforts in the Libertarian party (read the archives—I was on the Washington State Platform Committee for the Republicans because Ron Paul at 72 years of age ran as a Republican after spending his career following your “advice”). In short, your arrogance doesn’t suit your ignorance and apparent stupidity.

108

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:10 | #

GW: Birthright to the English ancestral homeland is severally received. A spot of unpleasantness in Amritsar long, long ago is not. Likewise, the birthright of white Americans to the land their forefathers made is severally received. The responsibility for slavery in 17th and 18th century America is not.

If I understand what you are saying, it is similar to something I’ve thought about with regard to liability for reparations for slavery in the US, which is that although, contrary to your statement, it is severally received, the “several” descendants of Jewish traders, African Chieftains and Antebellum Plantation Owners to receive that liability is a much smaller “several” than the descendants of the yeoman farmers who created vastly greater carrying capacity in the New World than that which existed upon their arrival.

Of course, this accounting chore is a torturous mess—rife with the potential for courtroom spin from biased historians and stacked juries.

Justice can operate.

I’ve seen precious little evidence of it in the courts when it comes to the justice for the majority: majority rights.

109

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:13 | #

Here, by the way (up this morning over at the Vdare.com Blog), is an example of what happens to those who stick with moderation on the immigration issue as Silver counsels us to do: the (fill in the blank) _____ tar them with the “extremist” brush anyway:

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008/11/19/numbersusa-peter-thiel-and-the-wages-of-moderation/

Ian Jobling gets tarred with the “extremist” brush to the exact same degree we do here, and has nothing to show for his moderation: his readership approaches zero. Nobody reads him. (Except us, the “extremists.”) Are the Jews flocking to his site, as he presumably hopes? If you can call 2½ Jews “flocking” I guess yeah, the Jews are “flocking” to his site: he’s got ‘White Jewish & Proud,” “Jewish Race Realist,” and some guy who bills himself as “Half-Jew.” Yup, Jobling’s got the Jewish readership market cornered with his “moderation” strategy.)

There’s moderation and there’s truth. Where the two coincide, fine, and where they don’t, fine too, I’m up for it. Enough said. Let Silver put that in his “Serbs aren’t white” pipe and smoke it. Silver wants “moderation,” he wants “politeness”? I can out-“moderation,” out-“politeness” Silver (or any Jew on the planet, for that matter) any day of the week and in three languages with a pretty damn good showing in a fourth if pressed. You wanna watch me in “politeness” action, you’ll think you were back a few centuries in the royal court of Louis the Sixteenth. There’s a time for that, as well. And there’s a time for stark truth-telling too, and let the chips fall where they may, very sorry for any offense taken but hey we didn’t start this. But, speaking of “time,” time will tell who’ll finish it.

110

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:14 | #

Fred,

We do carry moderate material, for example the pieces that David Hamilton sends to me and the more applicable to our interests of those sent by Martin. But for Silver the blog is primarily distinguished by the commentariat, which I am not about to change!

There is only something to be said for speaking to the sleeping leftist in gentle tones if the core message is retained and does not trigger him into hurling the usual abuse. If Silver can pull that off, more power to his elbow. I can’t, and wouldn’t try.

111

Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:22 | #

Here is a comment addressed to me by one of the quivering lemmings at Takimag:

Captainchaos,

They think anything is good thing if they can gain power and jobs. They have no standards. As far as the loss of a white majority, I look at it as a sort of martyrdom where we must live as an minority group of outcasts. But, we can choose to live as Christians, or die trying.

Posted by Josh on Nov 19, 2008.

Translation: The Jews have my balls in a mason jar on their mantle. If I ask for them back they might not approve.

Here is my response to Josh:

“...I look at it as a sort of martyrdom where we must live as an minority group of outcasts.” - Josh

I don’t hear much fighting spirit, Josh. Why do you think our enemies think they can get away with pushing us around? It’s because we think and act like that.

The absurdity of it is that I don’t have a fundamentally different understanding of what the core problems facing our people are contrasted with the big guns here - yet if I say it they take my posts down. The difference? I refuse to speak in euphemisms. I refuse to pay ANY kind of respect to a structure of taboos that is rotten to its core. And, ultimately, I am willing to die to save my people. In short, I am a White man.

Posted by Captainchaos on Nov 20, 2008.

Translation: Get your balls back from the Jews. Don’t ask permission.

When will these snivelling freakin’ cowards realize that if they think they are beaten they already are?

Hey, silver, any thoughts?

112

Posted by Guest on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:56 | #

Kevin MacDonald paints a rosy picture of the future doesn’t he, who would’ve thought he would go all Pollyanna on us!

When a group has worked since 1880 to dispossess the founding stock of America it probably does pay not to ever mention them. at the very least never to ascribe ill motives to their demonstrable successes.

In England it is a crime to defend yourself. In Australia a judge from the bench told Toben, the truth is no defence

Maybe the good counsel of the mufti approach to White Survival is what people should listen to, Jared Taylor is an excellent example.

Jared’s decision to STIFLE and CENSOR all criticism of the Inner Party is quite an indictment of his character and his courage.

It is like those newspaper reports that will mention, clothing, car, but not the RACE of the perpetrator, all very PC you know and with equally good results.

BNP played it nice and cute with the Inner Party, whilst freely blasting the religion of Islam. Wow that’s brave.

Of couse the following, assassinated, White Man was a bad, bad, bad man.

‘If wanting to preserve White, Western, Christian society makes us Nazis, then by George let’s be Nazis!’
- Commander George Lincoln Rockwell

113

Posted by a Finn on Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:19 | #

James Bowery: “... if it weren’t so arrogant.”

- That is all in your head James.

I use your kind words; your arrogance doesn’t suit your ignorance and apparent stupidity. Here is why:

* The suggestions were not intended to be an analysis of third party efforts or details of US political system.

JB: “... Ron Paul at 72 years of age ran as a Republican after spending his career following your advice”

* The advice was not meant to be to the top level, but to the grassroots level and from there upwards. Top-down model is too clumsy, inaccurate and has many of the same problems that mass marketing has in general. In top-down model the support is also too vague on average at the grassroots level. If the supporters create much of the campaign and work for their candidate, the support is more is intense, and thus creates more results and creates new campaigning supporters. The question here is not if this has been done or not, but to what extent and how much would be necessary to reach a tipping point.

I add slightly information about the Finnish 2008 municipal elections and the campaign of Jussi Halla-aho.

Halla-aho is an extraordinary politician. He decided that he don’t campaign almost at all (Very small and insignificant advertising campaign, 2 appearances in party tour events and no election campaign group), he just does what he always does and he becomes elected or not. Media, other parties and “elites” were viciously against Halla-aho and True Finns party. In theory not a promising situation. In practice landslide victory and breakthrough to Halla-aho and True Finns. The explanation is the grassroots support and work combined with Halla-aho’s work through the years.

I certainly recommend intense campaigning to third party politicians together with grassroots campaingning.

The situation is more complex In the United States, but there are lessons to be learned from the Finnish elections.

114

Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:55 | #

Finn: “The situation is more complex In the United States, but there are lessons to be learned from the Finnish elections.”

I think some of your suggestions are useful for building a bond of trust between individual Whites, their families, still other Whites and their families, and White leaders. The worse the economy gets the more these things will be needed and welcomed. If we help them out they may be more inclined to listen, at least it couldn’t hurt. Even if political office is not achievable, the main thing is to get Whites to begin to think of themselves as a people and to establish a cohesive group strategy.

115

Posted by a Finn on Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:17 | #

Captainchaos: “Even if political office is not achievable, the main thing is to get Whites to begin to think of themselves as a people and to establish a cohesive group strategy.”

- Exactly, but political office is certainly possible.

116

Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:43 | #

The emergence of third parties to viability has occurred in the US, but, for example the Republican party emerged under the Civil War over slavery. I would submit the founding stock of the US has been put under the yoke of slavery by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965—if not the denial of the right of States to secede after slavery was abolished in the Civil War. So, yes, a third party is a possibility, but it is very likely to involve very severe events including quite a bit of violence because our present “plantation” is run straight out of Washington D.C.

No, if there is to be a peaceful alternative—it is more likely to involve the kind of activity the Ron Paul folks were engaged in during the last election and are now engaged in with the Campaign for Liberty:

Grass roots—certainly. Using the grassroots to make contact with and form coalitions at the local level—certainly—you haven’t been following my posts here at MR about the Ron Paul campaign starting earlier this year.

We’re way ahead of you. Read up.

But third party?

Not likely if you want to avoid violence.

117

Posted by a Finn on Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:22 | #

James, I wrote to at least some of the Ron Paul threads and encouraged people to participate in the campaign in real life, not just in internet.

What to me is important is that pro European-Americans can influence their situation politically, not if it happens with a third party or through Republicans. Grassroots suggestions apply in both cases.

118

Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:18 | #

Speaking as someone who has organized at the grassroots to successfully pass legislation and organized Ron Paul supporters not only to get platform planks passed at the local and state level, but participate in food production as backing for local currency, I can honestly say that you have nothing to offer the US.

Stop stroking your ego on the internet and get back to “the real world” in Finland.

119

Posted by a Finn on Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:38 | #

James, you are still nothing to me because of your mean ego and inability to understand the difference between what I wrote here and you did.

120

Posted by a Finn on Sat, 22 Nov 2008 22:15 | #

Addition to James: As an (self described) vertical individualist, you are the one who has the propensity to stroke his ego.

121

Posted by a Finn on Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:39 | #

Short analysis.

Backround; I beat James in earlier debate, thus the former neutrality turned to hostility and he just waited suitable moment of attack. This is, for the most part, his tactic in general.

* He didn’t criticize the content of my post in any way and this time indirectly acknowledged some of it’s value.

* He creates strawmen, e.g. arrogance. When I make suggestions, which anybody can freely either take or leave, it is polite. If part of the readers find useful things from my posts, the posts have accomplished their purpose.

Compare this to James (the second paragraph from this onward).

* He uses ad hominems and exaggerated and incorrect horror scenarios, e.g. universal virulence, likely hoping to cause a situation where the other party starts to fear that his suggestions / information etc. will lead to a bad outcome and thus changes his opinion to suit the will of James.

* When he can’t compete, he starts to list his resume (this has happened many times), that has nothing to do with the topic. With it he tries to establish (ruling) authority and higher social status (at the same time stroking his ego), which are meant to cause general deference to his will and silence the other party. It is not my job to estimate the quality of an irrelevant resume.

* He tries to make debate a national question between Usa and Finland, thus again dragging irrelevant things to the debate. The logic of this is that if somebody believes it is a national debate, people are more likely to not care about facts and just defend the own side, including the manipulating James. He makes sweeping nonsensical statements: “You have nothing to offer the US” This from a man who can’t represent even himself properly, how he could do it for the whole Usa.

Answers to my posts indicate, that at least some European-Americans have found them useful. For every positive answer, there are many more with positive attitude who stay silent.

James, if you want to revenge this post, now or in the future, please do. The pleasure is all mine.

Ps. I am already in Finland, I don’t have to go back to it.

122

Posted by A son of Arminius on Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:58 | #

Didn’t take him long to plant his liver lips on Israel’s arse.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=171492&title=indecision-5768

Comments:

Post a comment:

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Links

MR Central & News

Comments